Is President effective in addressing violence against women?

Are these lines not extensions of the idea that has inspired the Modi government to launch ‘Partition Horrors Remembrance Day? It only shows the paucity of the ideas and will to act. Her evoking the “Rakshabandhan” also gives a sectarian solution to a pandemic that has gripped our society. It weakens her slogan of “enough is enough.”

President Droupadi Murmu’s remarks on Kolkata rape and murder have made headlines in the media. But her words “enough is enough” are too loud to impress anyone. The occasion she has chosen makes her statement explicitly political. She has been conspicuous by her absence during Manipur violence and the women wrestlers’ protest at Jantar Mantar. Several other incidents too demanded her reaction, but she remained silent. Her recent statement only makes her a part of the political chorus of the BJP aimed at deriding Mamata Banerjee’s regime in West Bengal.

However, her long statement should be discussed not because she is a woman but because she is the constitutional head of the state. It is more than a policy statement. It should be taken as the philosophy of the state. We need to differentiate between the Indian state and the ruling regime. Modi’s government has been chosen to care for the state and is only a transitory arrangement. The Indian state is an eternal entity. The president has undermined the state by making a statement inspired by the motive of immediate political gains.

Does her statement address fundamental issues related to violence against women? Does it contain anything substantial? Can her call for “unbiased self-introspection” stir the minds of the people? A close look at the statement only reveals that she has resorted to popular generalizations and tried to justify the stance of the RSS and the BJP. She makes generalizations such as, “Women have had to fight for every inch of ground they have won. Social prejudices as well as some customs and practices have always opposed the expansion of women’s rights. This is a rather deplorable mindset.” And, then she comes to the view the RSS and other rightwing forces hold: “I won’t call it a male mindset, because it has little to do with the gender of the person; there are many, many men who don’t have it. This mindset sees the female as a lesser human being, less powerful, less capable, less intelligent. Those who share such views then go further and see the female as an object.” President Murmu further elaborates: “It is this objectification of women by a few that is behind the crimes against women. It is ingrained deeply in the minds of such people. Let me also note here that, regrettably, this is the case not only in India but across the world. The difference between one place and the next is more of a degree than kind.”

The pet argument of ‘objectification’ is used to circumvent patriarchy, class, and caste dominance. This is an abstraction of the violence that has been in existence in every human society. In her groundbreaking work, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape (1975), American feminist and author Susan Brownmiller says, “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear. Women are all female impersonators to some degree. A world without rape would be a world in which women moved freely without fear of men.She says that man's discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to generate fear must rank as one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe.

Her statement directly points to the issue of power and dominance that leads to violence against women. The “objectification” argument denies the very source of the violence against women—the use of power and dominance by men to subjugate women. How power plays an important role in violence against women could be seen in stories that we heard during the ‘Me Too’ movement. We can see it in custodial violence against women and rapes in police stations. How violence emanates from the political power or victims suffer for raising their voices could be seen in the case of BJP leader Kuldip Singh Senger. There are several other cases.

The violence against women in Manipur only shows the interplay of political power, religion, and ideology. Both Kuki and Meitei women had to face it alike. When people become part of a power structure that needs division and violence, tolerance is lost. This has been the case in Manipur. The involvement of organizations with communal leanings is all well known. We have seen how, during the partition of India, women became the worst victims of communal valance. How communalism affects our response to violence against women could be seen in the case of Kathua Case, where a section of society stood in to defend the culprit.

Violence against Dalit women is a classic example of power and dominance. It is institutionalized and hardly evokes the required response. We have seen the response of the government and media in the Hathras rape and murder.

Should not President Murmu, as the chief of state, give some better insight? She talks of the Nirbhaya case and says, “In the twelve years since that tragedy in the national capital, there have been countless tragedies of similar nature, though only a few drew nationwide attention. Even these were soon forgotten. Did we learn our lessons? As social protests petered out, these incidents got buried into a deep and inaccessible recess of social memory, to be recalled only when another heinous crime takes place. This collective amnesia, I am afraid, is as much obnoxious as that mindset I spoke of.”

Are these lines not extensions of the idea that has inspired the Modi government to launch ‘Partition Horrors Remembrance Day? It only shows the paucity of the ideas and will to act. Her evoking the “Rakshabandhan” also gives a sectarian solution to a pandemic that has gripped our society. It weakens her slogan of “enough is enough.”

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)