Well, all that the conversations and news feeds have been going on and on about is Leslee Udwin's
India's Daughter.
Did I see it? Yes.
Did I like it? Yes.
Do I think it is relevant? Yes.
Do I oppose the ban? Yes.
Do I think it is flawless? No.
Some feminists want to ban the documentary thinking it would incite more rapes? Seriously? Then bring it on, I say, for then perhaps, FINALLY, humanity will revolt and put an end to this nonsense show of power.
Yes, Mukesh has been given space to present his views. So? Why should he not speak? If we cannot, do not, engage with these people then how will we know what they are thinking? Why they did what they did? It is all very well to say they are monsters, but they were born human weren't they? Furthermore, it perhaps might be easy to dismiss them as anomalies to be extinguished, if their actions were not merely the tip of a humongous iceberg of women's oppression.
In fact, it is not merely women's oppression. Imagine men who feel they have the responsibility to be the guardians of a society's mores and must enforce said morality through hook or crook. Imagine a boy belonging to a household so poor that they starve for days that he ran away to make his living in a place, any place. Imagine men who think that women have one role to play and men another. If a man, thus, is unable to protect (read control, if need be) his family, or defend its honour, then he kills and commits suicide. In fact, one of the rapists in this case allegedly did just that. We do not know why. Imagine the growth of society with a large population burdened with such belief systems. Why imagine? See. See India.
Then there is the other side of the coin - the understanding friend. The guy who makes Jyoti Singh sound even more saint like than her parents made her out to be. That is some achievement!
I mean, really!!!
Her friend wanted to watch an action film and she wanted to watch
Life of Pi and that is presented as if it were the Holy Grail she had chosen
. Right because if she had agreed to see a film such as
Love, Sex, Dhoka (LSD) she would have been less deserving of the basic safety standards, is it?
She once got a juvenile pickpocket thief new jeans, and food and asked him to never steal again. I commend her efforts, her intentions, but please do not tell me that her stop gap solution was a solution at all. That was just as worthless as the Bar Council slapping a show cause notice on the defence lawyers NOW. Where was any such agitation invoked when one of the idiots, on television, mind you, stated he would take his womenfolk to his farmhouse and set them ablaze with petrol if they dared eschew "morality"!
She worked in a call center to fund her studies. Again commendable. Especially, when you contrast her efforts with those of her rapists who whiled away their time drinking and partying.
She wanted to open a hospital in her village. Super. I am not deriding her ambition, or her social activism, but the effort to make her seem to be the equivalent of Mother Teresa or some such august personality gets my goat.
The friend makes Jyoti Singh sound holier than thou and makes a case for "good women" vs "bad women" almost as much as the lawyers in the film. In fact, even more dangerously, insidiously.
In fact, the film, and I refuse to call it a documentary for the overly dramatic script writing done, makes such a strong argument of the sheer "goodness" of the girl that it seems to be catering to the rapists' ideology that says "good girls" do not fight, go out late in the night, party, etc.
I do not care if she were studying to be fashion designer and wanted to make pots of money. She deserved to be safe and be allowed to follow her dreams. The way that the film made her out to be saint irritates me because it then seems to espouse the same ideology it supposedly fights against.
The constant repetition that it was ONLY 8:00 pm. That is "not late" (read 'not bad'). WTF. I come home at 1:00 am sometimes. So? And it matters, does it, if I were coming home from a 'party' or my workplace?
Sheer bloody nonsense. That kind of mentality gets me almost more riled than the rape.
We need safety. PERIOD.
I really like the film. I think it raises important issues. I think it has been well researched to a large extent. It has tried to explore multiple perspectives, which is more than can be said of those imposing the ban on this film.
I liked the sheer pathos that wife of one of the rapists invokes saying her plight is pitiable and that there are worse criminals and that she would die and perhaps need to kill her infant son without male support of her husband, whom she contends (a) did not rape and (b) there are multitudes out there with worse crimes than what her husband is accused of. Also true.
The psychiatrist who matter-of-factly states the chilling fact that there are men in jail convicted for a dozen or so rapes, when they themselves claim that the rapees number at least 200 that they can remember.
I like that Udwin focused on Mukesh's hands to show his discomfort. I also wonder at the people who want the rapists to show remorse. Why? Would you forgive them then? Would you ask for a repeal of the death sentence? By the way, how does one show remorse? In the eyes? What if he were conscious of the camera, of being spoken to, of having company, female company, after being put in prison? These are men who were asked to pose for a front, left and right profile reminding them of their criminal status. I for one am GLAD he did not show remorse. The way people are at it, it almost seems they would forgive him for having learnt his lesson! He should in 02 years learn that what he had observed, learnt for his entire life was wrong? Have we learnt our lesson to NOT expect change overnight? To NOT be self-congratulatory about how much better we are? To NOT discontinue the agitation for better, more sensitive, more nuanced understanding of the problem? To NOT shy away from even more troubling facts such as marital rape?
Yes, the film is NOT unbiased. I do think Leslee Udwin has over dramatised an already dramatic narrative. The documentary maker is in love with the protagonist. Which is her right. And which is fine. But I want more narratives unfolding from this one. Many more narratives.
The easy way out provided by most activists on the show is 'education'. Puhleez!! Let's look at our education system steeped in patriarchal mores. The 'educated' friend emphasising the "goodness" of Jyoti, the lawyers (they hold valid certifications to practice law, don't they) making statements about woman equating her to a 'flower' or a 'diamond' or thinking one has the right to set her ablaze, the social activists, some of them feminists, so many government officials, many of whom are educated (at least they have a degree) tell me that mere education is NOT enough.
Let's engage in debates. Let's probe. Let's confront reality. Let's allow space for alternative views, however, uncomfortable they make us, however much they differ from ours, however radical they may seem. For if we do not, we are no better than those behind the attacks at Charlie Hebdo's offices.
I think we are mistaking listening for accepting. It is NOT. It is a step towards reflecting, analysing, engaging, acting or not acting, changing or not changing, but always improving.
Here's to an India when Transgenders, Women, Men, All are treated at par.
May we find reasons galore to celebrate HUMANITY each day of each year.
- Written on 8 March 2015
- Self-Explanatory
First written in comments section in https://kafila.online/2015/03/08/indian-feminists-indias-daughter-and-sexual-violence-the-issues-at-stake/
Posts
