Monday, April 29, 2013

The issue of rape and sexual abuse

This is one of the most serious things I ever wrote on, or will write about. It will be long, but I plead everyone to read this to the end. This article has made me pack my DDP work for a while to write on the issue:
http://tehelka.com/what-are-we-doing-to-our-kids-2/?singlepage=1
There is a strong movement in social media now against this issue. I strongly believe that the people who are involved in speaking up on the issue are missing a fundamental point- The strong exploit the weak. Rape and sexual abuse is just one manifestation of that. While we sit in our rooms condemning rapes and men in general for this attitude towards women, millions are dying out of hunger. We say all men (and women) are born equal, but they're not. Some are born strong, some are born weak. Circumstances decide that. A European is in general stronger than an African, simply because the former has better facilities than the latter.

Before I write further, I have an appeal to make. I believe that a lot of people who read my blog  disagree with my views, but not based on logic and reason. People do not want to think that I, just another student, can understand things better than themselves. They want to believe that I am not better than them, and hence disagree with me without even caring to think about whatever I write. Some agree with me simply because they think that I am a reasonable guy and hence whatever I write must have some merit. I urge whoever's reading this to think clearly, on the merit of the reasoning, and not based on who's writing this.

Coming to the issue at hand- sexual abuse against women and children. It is not just sex, it is about the strong exploiting the weak. It happens everywhere, with countries attacking others, with economic classes, with social classes, with bullies in school, with intellectually strong people stealing jobs from intellectually weak ones. It is a fact of nature, a rule of life. This issue of rape blames men for their conduct. That is just senseless. It is just about the strong trying to exploit the weak. If the women were stronger than men, they'd do something else to exploit men.

Throughout history, strong tribes have annihilated weak ones. Women are weak. I'm no male chauvinist, I'm just stating a fact. Women are physically weak. And men will look to exploit them, forever. Unless women can show that they are not weak. The only reason that women, as a species, are not extinct is that men had realized that women are needed to entertain their sexual desires and to perpetuate their race. The whole equal rights to women, job opportunities to women or anything else you see is just a way to pacify them, to give them an illusion that there's a chance for them to not be exploited. And this is all a simple result of the fact that men are, in general, physically stronger. Physical strength was the important thing when civilizations started. Men have defined the rules of the game, the constructs of society. If women had pioneered the rise of our species, we would be living in an entirely different world.

This can be seen in other situations too- whenever the economically strong are threatened by the economically weak, they pacify them by making populist policies, promising better living conditions, offering some hope. When the socially lower classes threatened the upper classes, the upper classes gave them some social rights. All of that is just a way for the stronger ones to survive by pacifying the weak ones.

This is all just a rule of life. All of us want to dominate others, we want to be better than others, we want to have more cash, more fame, more happiness than the others. That's the reason we play sports- to win and hence show our domination over others. We want that we are better than most of the people. We have the top 10% of the people having way more cash/power than the other 90%. But what would happen if the 90% revolted against the 10%? It is too scary for the 10%, so they devise ways to pacify the 90%.

Would stronger laws change anything? No. Read the article I first referred to. Its not just the law, its a failure of the system. There are laws. But what good are they if no case ever gets to the court? First, the victims don't dare to speak about sexual assaults against them. Even if they do, they are humiliated. Their families threaten them to be silent. They cover things up. If the family dares to file a case, the police won't accept it so easily. The society threatens or even banishes the family. If the police do register the case and it finally comes to the court, the victim must then go through even more humiliation. And even after all that, there is no guarantee that the case would stick.

And then, what about an average citizen who doesn't have the means to go through a case? Not everyone has the support of activists or NGOs. Or a child who doesn't even know what to do? How would a law help any of it? Who will save a child from being molested by her own father? And even the law has certain standards. What about groping or molestation or teasing? Can a law take care of all that?

The only solution to this, or any other such problem, is for the weak to get stronger. We hear about 5-6 guys gang-raping a girl, but have you ever heard of 1 guy raping 5-6 women? Its not possible, 5-6 women would easily overpower a single man. That is what must happen, more women must be present in offices, in buses, on the streets. That will discourage any man who sees a woman to be weak.

How can a mother save her child from being harassed by her husband? Physically overpowering him is rarely possible. Even if she does, what will she do without him if she is not financially secure? First thing for a woman is to be financially secure, she must not be dependent on a man for her basic needs. Being financially secure is not enough, she must be ready to end her marriage with any husband who does not respect her and her children's rights. All the women in a community must be ready to support each other whenever a man threatens any of them. They must be well connected socially.

This problem can't be tackled by just sitting and commenting on it. Women must take to the fight. Protests and debates achieve nothing, things have to change at the grass root level. All women must understand the threat and come out of their houses into a larger community. Remember how it was with the Indian freedom struggle? There were traitors within the country. Millions of Indians could not take on thousands of British (due to the modern weaponry of the British, each British soldier was stronger than a single Indian soldier, just like a single man is physically stronger than a single woman). The first revolutionaries were brutally killed. Even sympathizers with the cause were punished. But when it turned into a mass movement, the British had no option but to leave the country. This has happened through out history- the weak must rise in numbers if they are to defend themselves.

But then, this is no war, even the enemy is not clear. How can any woman say which man is an enemy? The only option is to have a sufficient number of women in every aspect of life to discourage any attempt to assault women. The families are what decide what children do, and families are still headed by men. Its not going to be easy for women to come out of their houses. Speeches are not enough, a mass movement is what is required.

Having said all this, am I willing to give up on my career and fight for the cause of women. No. I am not going to fight for it. Not because I don't believe in whatever I said, but simply because it is pointless. It is the women that must rise and fight. There are enough strong and secure women to take it up. I have my own demons and battles to fight.
Throughout the article, I maintain that women are weak. If someone thinks that I'm wrong and women are in fact stronger than men, then women must be plain stupid to have men exploit them for so long. Solving any problem is possible only by first accepting that there is a problem. Living in denial changes nothing.

3 comments:

  1. First of all, very thoughtfully written. I read your article in morning. one point stuck in my mind..where you wrote " The only option is to have a sufficient number of women in every aspect of life to discourage any attempt to assault women."......

    women who are already at good positions do not help women(victims)...for example , as mentioned in article in, tehlka the woman sub inspetor who taunted and threatened the victim..and here is one such pic http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=510689192328046&set=a.474036729326626.111591.100001609081254&type=1&ref=nf
    ...there are several such incidents... i really wonder how many read your article or shared or commented on your article, or on FB....

    anyway thats not the point....what i meant is ...we have(had) a female president..a female prime minister and other females as lawyers, police, IAS, IPS, good companies etc etc,... they are already there.......What more or how many more females should be there in every aspect of life...actually they are there , but just don't care......

    ReplyDelete
  2. We, men, can talk all we want on this issue, but for women it is a very sensitive one... Forget about acting on it, most women are too ashamed to even talk about it. Even if a woman is in power, she's still an isolated person in a male dominated world. Things will change only when they all accept that there is a problem and say "okay, this is a big problem and we're gonna deal with it". Its too hard for a single woman to be talking about this, it must happen in a group. And this group must then approach all the women in a village, city or a country and change their attitude towards the problem. Women are scared of men, they're scared that if they address this issue, they'll be targeted- that's why the women in power don't dare to respond. But if all the women around are talking about the issue and they know that they got each other's backs- that is when a change is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  3. you are correct. But then, look at the reactions of women in political groups such as Sonia Gandhi, Sheela dixit, Sushma swaraj.... (and then celebrities & their tweets... ) etc etc...if they wanted to do something...they could have done something instead of saying mere words... imagine a case where mass movement or protest is headed by a women in political party or a celebrity (like JayaBachan; who said that she is 'terrible disturbed' at the time of Delhi rape case). Public(women) is not afraid but they ultimately loose their enthusiasm in protest or mass movement...because they look for getting justice which they do not get from the corrupt govt.
    Women who have greater influence or power in society, can play a big role in bringing a change.

    ReplyDelete