Time to let women think and act for themselves

By Chitra Ahanthem
Sometimes just sometimes, blind prejudices and bigotry is all it takes to unite a certain section of the male human species. The world media is still keeping its spotlight on 14 year old Malala Yousafzai of Pakistan who was shot at point blank range while she was in her school vehicle with other school children. Her ‘crime’? She had openly advocated for education of girls in a region which was mostly under Taliban control. Nearer home in Haryana, the Sarva Khap Jat Panchayat in Rohtak said in a statement that the marriage age for girls be lowered to curb rising incidents of rape in the state. Another Khap panchayat in Haryana`s Jind district blamed consumption of chowmein behind the growing incidents of rapes in the state saying it led to hormonal imbalance. Joining the ranks of the groups of men who decide what girls should do and what should be done on their account, a particular underground group in Manipur imposed the first ban in Manipur in 2000. They banned all ‘Indian wear’ and in the years that followed, the ban went on to impose restrictions even on school-girls wearing skirts. Why? Because girls are the pillars of the Meitei culture and tradition silly! According to them, of course!

What is common of all such bans and in the case of Malala, the horrific attack on her that left her with critical injuries? The common factor is that there are men and groups of men who believe that girls and women should be kept in their limits and repressed from taking stands on their own. In case of Haryana, what the Khap panchayats have done is to totally absolve all men who have raped women, who have violated women’s bodies and left them with mental and emotional scars and in Manipur, the ban on girls to wear skirts and women to wear ‘Indian attire’ shows the condescending nature that comes in play when it comes to women and smacks totally of double standards. Boys in schools have never been banned from wearing trousers and men wear continue to wear  totally ‘Indian’ male attire like dhoti (even though it may be called a Meitei name like Pheijom), kurta and pyajamas. So why the ban on the ‘Indian’ attire of girls and women in a community that propagates the ‘empowered women’ and the ‘high position that Manipuri women occupy compared to other women in the rest of the country’ theory? Why a ban on women where they presumably ‘lead from the front’ (hint: Meira Paibis)?

The greatest irony is that when the first diktat on what women and girls should wear came out, the response was one of caution and a sense of fear. Understandable since the one imposing the diktat was an armed group. But the timid response of eminent women from all walks of life coming together to hold a state level meet appealing to the said group to ‘consider’ the case of working women to allow for wearing the ‘half saree’ since the lower wrap would be the traditional Phanek nailed what has followed since 2000. Cut to the present and it is no longer about armed groups calling for what women should wear and judging those who don’t wear the traditional dress. Check any Manipur related website or discussion forums and one finds vitriol laced attacks on girls and women who do not wear traditional dresses and marry non Manipuris.

Unfortunately, local newspapers in the state have also given space to such rants without engaging in the larger discussions in the form of editorials. While the media has the full authority to carry articles and opinions of all hues, thoughts and opinions, the thumb rule is that the editorials must bring objectivity to the topic being flagged off. Those who comment and point out the point of culture being a non static process, that women can and will decide what they will wear and whom they will marry, that there can be no concessions for men when it comes to codes and diktats are sharply attacked, made fun of and dragged on to totally unrelated areas of arguments. They are called non patriotic even! A recent article on a local newspaper on the author’s impression (not totally flattering) of Meitei women who dress in non Meitei dresses has probably got the most comments. While the author succeeds to have himself cut and quartered by suggesting that Meiteis would be better off following Korean culture because of similarities (???), the comments that have come in from some readers are a reflection of a growing fanaticism of sorts over Meitei identity and culture. Not many (comments) seem to be able to make a convincing point over why it should be girls and women who have to bear the burden of keeping Meitei traditions. Rather, they disgress into rants over why girls are going for Non Manipuris. The surprise factor is that there are some comments by women supporting what the article talks about.

We do live in a democracy (though increasingly becoming a minority populist voice speaking for the silent majority) and that means everyone is entitled to his or her view, no matter how warped or narrow minded it is. But till the time there is an voice saying that a few men cannot decide what is right and wrong for women to do and wear, the going can only get worse. The Taliban had earlier gone on a whipping frenzy of women in the same region where Malala lives. That was three years ago and now, they have reached the point where to stress their position they have shot a 14 year old girl. Manipur may soon become a mini Taliban in course of time if the debate is not shaped and structured. That is always how fanaticism takes root: through silence and through nonsensical arguments that have nothing to do with the main issue being discussed.

End-point:

Manipur, the place for general strikes and economic blockades is no stranger to bans by underground armed groups. When the first ever ban took place in 2000, with an underground ground barring movie theatres in the state from playing out Hindi films and local cable channels from airing Hindi entertainment channels, it led me to begin my writing association with IFP. In the 12 years since then, there has been more and more bans: some so silly (psst: eye lashes are actually banned in Manipuri films!) and some totally expected (when I wrote against the ban on wearing ‘Indian’ clothes, the particular group sent two armed man to warn me off). But those worried about Manipuri women, their chastity and modesty, how they should and must uphold Manipuri society and morals and all of that must take a moment to ponder over this: Mary Kom’s achievements so far that every Manipuri is so proud of would never have happened if she was a Meitei or was married to a Meitei! Why? She would have to confirm to the Meitei way of life: do household work and give up her sporting career. Too hard to digest? Give me then the name of any Meitei woman in active sports or athletics who have remained in her game after marriage. And there I rest my case.