 |
|
| HER WORLD | Sunday, June 22, 2003, Chandigarh, India |
| Social monitor ‘God, they made a man out of you!’ Sakoon K. Chhabra AS a teacher of English in a boy’s college, when I asked the BA I students to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper complaining about the growing incidence of beggary on the city streets, 95 per cent of the students began the letter with the address followed by the salutation Dear Sir. Only the more perceptive, a mere 5 per cent, gave women any chance of a high-profile career by including/Ma’am. It seems the majority still imagines only men occupying such important chairs. Battle of the sexes Their lives are scattered but they build for others |
|
|
Social monitor
Neil Armstrong has been lately given a thorough dressing down for conveniently overlooking half of humanity when he proclaimed on reaching the moon, "That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind." This is now quoted as a historical moment when an important public figure threw linguistic sensitivity to wind or rather botched it in lunar dust! This just brings to mind as to how certain language features, including its grammar and structure, help to reinforce the idea of male superiority and female inferiority. What is now termed "sexist" language often points towards a faulty perception of male dominance and superiority in many fields of life and its manifestation through language. There are thinkers like Dale Spender whose book Man Made Language (1981) argues that language is not a neutral medium but one that carries many features through which patriarchy finds expression. So whether it is a candidate who is asked through written instructions to be careful about his identity card or a prospective manager who is always thought of to be a man or the State Department that wishes to call its museum as one depicting the Evolution of Man or the Literature teacher who describes Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman as the tragedy centering around the common man—all these instances and innumerable more go on to prove how sexist our language is and how effortlessly it lays bare the thought that still discriminates. It is importantly to analyse this trend because while we may put several layers of political correctness on our formal and public discourse, gender discrimination when it has to, oozes out unseen from such unexpected quarters.
If we were to analyse our own languages and if we talk specifically of, say, Punjabi there exist innumerable examples that reflect this bias in language. The common everyday parlance, just like English, proves this but a look at our proverbs takes us a step further. Our idioms, proverbs and saying are a repository of folk wit and wisdom but much as we resent, also of our historical bias against women. Some such misogynous proverbs, sayings and idioms that portray women in a particularly derogatory light include: Kudiyan, chidiyan, bakriyan-tinno jatan athriyan (Women, sparrows and goats-the three are an unseemly tribe) Note how women are bundled together flippantly with animals and birds, the implicit comment on their worth. Teevin kutt li kandh kutt li ik barabar hai (whether you bash up a wall or a woman, it amounts to the same) reflects the extremely derogatory position given to women and also the frequent incidence of physical abuse. Utth ni kudiye dam kar charkha chhad te chakki far. (O woman, take a breather, leave the charkha get on with the chakki) The exploitation of labour done by women at home, which along with being unpaid is also devalued. Some common instances of linguistic sexism occur when while addressing a group or while thinking of a possible incumbent for a job male-as-a-norm is used, such as: Each candidate should include three copies of his resume with the application. This kind of sexism is found abundantly and quite glaringly in no lesser book but our very own Indian Constitution. Though our Constitution has given the provision of positive discrimination for the benefit of women, there are scores of articles, which, while talking of the powers of Governors, MPs, MLAs, Ministers, and Prime Minister etc. take on the generic pronoun he, which excludes all Indian women. At other times there is an irrelevant reference to gender: That woman MP is really assertive In India we still come across the convention lady doctor. There is also an irrelevant reference to the physical appearance of women. Conventions include giving descriptions of women in terms of age and appearance, while describing men in terms of ability and career accomplishments. Examples: Aarti, the girl with long hair has just entered her first year of medical school. Nafisa, an attractive 49-year-old physician and her husband Virendra, a pilot with the Indian Airways. Language plays a part in sexism though it is disputed whether certain language features cause sexism or sexism causes these language features. Linguistics and psychology students are aware of what is famously called the Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis, which invalidates the assumption that language is merely a set of symbols for the communication of our thoughts. The theory argues that thinking requires language and the characteristics of a particular language actually shape the specific manner in which users of a language think about things. In other words it says that the particular language use determines how people see the world. The hypothesis is controversial and some thinkers believe in the precedence of thinking over language rather than other way round as the Whorf-Wapir hypothesis suggests. However many critics see the relationship between language and perception as being circular or dialectical. We can say that thinking initially precedes language as a cause for its evolution, however language ultimately takes over and then fashions our thought. To the cause of studying sexism in language this view is appropriate because the present language structure can be ascribed to the patriarchal superiority that our society has held for a long time. However, the conscious effort to make our language gender neutral can be espoused more fervently by the logic that if we are not proactive and do the needful today language might strongly inject the prejudice that it carries with it and continue to affect our thinking. Sexism projected through language is a
political issue today. It is reflected through the language we choose to
use. Many people speaking or writing English today wish to avoid using
language, which supports biased attitude to a particular sex, usually
women. This consciousness is important because sexist language is being
increasingly regarded as a defect in writing. More importantly,
language, just like it reflects the thought, also fashions it in turn.
Therefore, not making it gender sensitive would be truly regressive. We
have already ignored it long enough while they declared God a man. |
|
Battle of the sexes
It would be a grave error to ignore the role that literacy played in turning Nisha's no to dowry into a movement against the social evil. An evil that the anti-dowry law has failed to stamp out. If the trend continues, and there is no reason why it should not, the Indian woman may have taken another step in the direction of gender empowerment. However, the most important aspect that the incident revealed has virtually gone unnoticed. It provided proof of what a woman most wants. Give it to her and she will return it with the value addition of love, companionship and care. Nisha's spunk reminded me of a story about King Arthur. The story should become a part of contemporary Indian lore. Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighbouring kingdom. The monarch could have killed him, but was moved by Arthur's youthful happiness. So Arthur was offered freedom, if he could answer a very difficult question. He was given an year to figure out the answer. If he did not get the answer, he would be killed. The question: What do women really want? Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man, and, to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query. Since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch's proposition to have an answer by year's end. He returned to his kingdom and sought the help of everybody, including the princesses, the prostitutes, the priests, the wise men, the court jesters, the country bumpkin. No one could give him a satisfactory answer. What most people did tell him was to consult the old witch, as only she would know the answer. The price would be high, since the witch was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged. The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no alternative but to talk to the witch. She agreed to answer his question, but he would have to accept her price first: The old witch wanted to marry Gawain, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table and Arthur's closest friend! Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunchbacked and awfully hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage water and often made obscene noises. He had never run across such a repugnant creature. He refused to force his friend to marry her and have to endure such a burden. Gawain, upon learning of the proposal, spoke to Arthur. He told him that nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to King's life, that he had pledged to the monarch of the neighbouring kingdom in the event of failing to give the right answer. The knight was also worried about the preservation of the Round Table. Hence, their wedding was announced, and the witch answered Arthur's question: What a woman really wants is to be able to be in charge of her own life. Everyone instantly knew that the witch had uttered a great truth and that Arthur's life would be spared. And so it went. The neighbouring monarch spared Arthur's life and granted him total freedom. Read on. The answer was not the end, but the beginning of a lovely and lucid story on women empowerment What a wedding Gawain and the witch had! Arthur was torn between relief and anguish. Gawain was proper as always, gentle and courteous. The old witch put her worst manners on display. She ate with her hands, belched and made everyone uncomfortable. The wedding night approached. Gawain, steeling himself for a horrible night, entered the bedroom. What a sight awaited! The most beautiful woman he had ever seen lay before him! The knight was astounded and asked what had happened. The beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her (when she'd been a witch), half the time she would be her horrible, deformed self, and the other half, she would be her beautiful maiden self. Which would he want her to be during the day and which during the night? What a cruel question! Gawain began to think of his predicament: During the day a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his home, an old spooky witch? Or would he prefer having by day a hideous witch, but by night a beautiful woman to enjoy many intimate moments? What would you do? What Gawain chose follows below, but don't read until you've made your own choice... Noble Gawain replied that he would let her choose for herself! Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time, because he had respected her and had let her be in charge of her own life. Isn't that beautiful? But really now, what is the moral of this story? If you don't respect
women, things are going to get ugly! Nisha and several other girls after
her proved it by showing the door to grooms who came looking for money
and not brides. |
|
Their lives are scattered but they build for others
CONSTRUCTION projects involve largest women contract labour in India. Some of these are migrants who travel hundreds of kilometres for work. These women labourers move with families. They are poor and a part of the unorganised sector, since their labour is contractual or casual. A 1971 law (Abolition of Contract Labour Act) sought to eliminate the practice of contract labour and provide some benefits such as maternity leave to women labourers in this field. It, however, is often violated. In some states construction workers are covered by the minimum wages law; in other states they are not. Phulesari, Ramvati, Kusibai, Rajeshwari, Parmila and Godavari work as contract labourers for the construction of a hostel at the Panjab University. All of them belong to Bilaspur district in Chattisgarh and are between 20 and 40 years. All of them have an agricultural background and own a house in their village. Just 50 per cent of these families own a marginal land (one acre). Though most of them wish to go home once in a year, Parmila and Rajeshwari have not been to home for the last ten years and Godavari for the last six years. Lives of these women are interesting. Before settling down for work none of them were known to each other. The day the contractor employed them, their first job was to construct a house for themselves. They constructed these houses in a day with mud and bricks and tin/cement sheets for roofs. A mini-colony of ten-twelve families emerges in a day. Their single-room structures are vulnerable to weather and sometimes even to heavy vehicles which accidentally ram into them. The settlement has a common corridor and the doors open in it. There are no facilities for bathroom and toilets and these women have to manage it in some corner or go behind dense bushes nearby. Their living conditions make them vulnerable to 'anything'. These women work for eight hours a day and get a meagre sum of Rs 50 per day. They are hardly aware of labour laws, according to which minimum wages have been fixed at Rs 80 per day. With this little sum, these women hardly manage savings and live at bare subsistence level. Although women admitted that men sometimes do the household work (when she gets ill), most of the time it is she who bears the triple burden of the construction work, household chores and looking after the children. If there is an elder daughter, she takes care of the siblings. Otherwise, there are no cr`E8ches or any other places where children can be looked after or supervised. Health standards of these women and children are far from satisfactory. Their diet intake includes very ordinary pulses, rice and wheat which do not necessarily fulfil the daily nutrient requirement. Although, there was awareness about the Pulse Polio immunisation programme, no child (except one) was immunised with DPT. The children are also vulnerable to accidents from construction activity and transportation vehicles. Moreover, these women are not provided with any maternity or sickness benefits because they are essentially seasonal labourers. Very often, they are even denied accident benefits as well. All the women are illiterate. Some males have, however, passed matriculation examination. Keeping in mind the large number of kids (one would question the hoopla over the family welfare programmes) they have (Phulaseri has four children, Ramvati and Kusibai two each, Parmila six and Rajeshwari one) and their meagre income which is hardly enough for living, they don't foresee education for them. Also, the migratory pattern of their living leaves no space for such activities. These women have earlier worked in Ropar, Kharar, Patiala, Rajpura, Ramdarbar, Dadumajra, Panchkula, Barnala and Kurukshetra. Women have their own means of recreation. All of them are Hindus and share every Hindu festivity. Men, in their free time, sit around, chat and smoke a bidi. For these migrant labourers, the marriage of a daughter brings joy, it also brings financial trouble and, often, indebtedness. There are hardly any ways in which these women can imagine ways to improve their lives. They believe that they are used to this way of life, perhaps because they see no way to change it for the better. In the absence of literacy and essentially militant unions and also the wherewithal to fight in courts, these women continue to earn below the stipulated minimum wages. They are handicapped in this regard because of both domestic obligations and the economic imperative of earning wages. They believe that this is, perhaps, their destiny. |
 |
 |
AS
a teacher of English in a boy’s college, when I asked the BA I
students to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper complaining
about the growing incidence of beggary on the city streets, 95 per cent
of the students began the letter with the address followed by the
salutation Dear Sir. Only the more perceptive, a mere 5 per cent,
gave women any chance of a high-profile career by including/Ma’am. It
seems the majority still imagines only men occupying such important
chairs.
EVER
since Nisha Sharma said no to dowry just about every literate single
woman seems to be following her example. I have lost count of the number
of girls who sent the baraat packing because of the groom's
greed. More by accident than design Nisha has become the symbol of
gender empowerment.