Apu’s World

Politicians and political types in my home state of Tamil Nadu are quick to pounce on women for alleged acts of disrespect to Indian culture, with dress codes often being the first line of attack. So, some time ago, we had these self-proclaimed defenders of culture attacking actress Shreya for wearing skimpy attire at an industry function. Never mind that these people (among thousands of others) probably enjoy watching the same actress prance around on screen wearing even less. Oh, because of course, the heroine in Tamizh movies exists only to sing, dance, reveal her body and provide a few jollies to male viewers, so then it’s all ok. But otherwise, our delicate sensibilities are offended. We can’t have it in ‘real life’, you see.

But, in what is probably a first even for good-at-offence-taking politicos, the Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam (TMMK), a party that claims to stand for Muslim aspirations, has now taken offence at a woman wearing too much. Yes, you heard that right - there is apparently such a thing as a woman covering up too much - if that woman happens to be soft-porn star Shakeela. Shakeela who attended a court hearing wearing a burkha, was pulled up by this outfit on the grounds that she had no right to wear a burkha since it is the symbol of ‘decent’ Muslim women. (I can’t find an English media reference, but for those who can read Tamizh, there is some info here).

Where do I even start dissing these people? For starters, there is the blithe acceptance of two distinct categories of women - the virtuous ones and the whores. The burkha is meant for the virtuous (who keep themselves shaded from men’s eyes), while the whores, because they have already exposed themselves to the public eye, have no claim to honour left. This dichotomy doesn’t of course take into account the reasons why many women in India take up occupations such as porn or prostitution. Certainly, few women would venture into these occupations, unless compelled by financial necessity.

Even the few women who enter it willingly, what’s so dishonourable about them? Yes, they play a role on screen or in the bedroom, but that’s where it ends. Our prudish attitudes to sex combined with the whore-madonna way of seeing women, makes us condemn them when we should be seeing it as an outcome of a fundamentally unequal world, where women are valued for their bodies more than anything else.

I wonder if the TMMK has issued a similiar condemnation of all the men who frequent Shakeela movies. Surely there must be a percentage of Muslims among them. Why doesn’t the TMMK bar them all from wearing skull caps or going to Friday prayers? But oh no, it’s only the actress who must be blamed - Men of course will just be men, men are not responsible for their actions, men are enticed by ‘loose women’ yada yada yada.

So, the TMMK feels free to say, “This woman, who appears half-naked before lakhs of people for the sake of money now wants to wear a burka when she appears in court; by this, she has angered Muslims”. Apart from the self-righteousness, there seems to be a very real inability to separate an actor’s personal and public life. So what do they expect? That Shakeela should appear half-naked everywhere? Taken to an extreme, do these morons expect Prem Chopra to start raping women or Amitabh Bachchan to spend his days clearing the streets of crime?

Lastly, these goons seem to lack an understanding of something known simply as freedom. What Shakeela wears is no one’s business but her own. No one else has any right to interfere with it. But then, understanding of individual rights has never been strong in India; we are always concerned more with the right of others to take offence.

Related Posts You May Like
1. Marriages, Live-ins and the Money involved
2. Sab Kaam Mummy Kyon Karti Hai?
3. The Cloud of Class

apu Women & Feminism