Gillette’s ‘The best a man can be’ advertisement has dared to be different in how it speaks to its male audience. Gillette

Viewed more than 23 million times on YouTube, the advert has so far attracted more than 330,000 comments, about 650,000 likes and 1.1 million dislikes. No advertising campaign challenging stereotypes about girls and women has ever been this controversial.
Gillette’s ‘We Believe: the best a man can be’ advertisement.

Perhaps that is because those adverts have tended to celebrate an “empowered” view of girls and women. There is even a term to describe this type of advertising with pro-female messages – femvertising – that has its own dedicated awards.
Challenging gender stereotypes of men, on the other hand, is proving less straightforward.

Other campaigns that have explored modern versions of masculinity have taken a similar approach to femvertising. But Gillette’s new advertisement is different. It uncompromisingly confronts problems such as sexism, bullying and harassment associated with toxic masculinity. As a result some perceive it as negative – a denunciation as opposed to a celebration of boys and men.

It exemplifies a significant creative challenge for advertisers at a watershed moment in the movement for gender equality. How do you celebrate masculinity without acknowledging toxic masculinity in this time of #metoo?

Gender stereotypes in advertising

My research examines sexist advertising practice and how this more broadly contributes to gendered inequalities. For example, how advertisements that glorify the violent exploitation of women work to normalise violence against women.

Fashion house Dolce & Gabbana’s 2007 spring/summer advertising campaign was criticised for simulating a gang rape scene. Supplied
Gender stereotypes are another form of sexist advertising practice.

Because advertisements must simply and persuasively communicate a message that can be understood by a relatively broad audience, the industry has long been susceptible to perpetuating stereotypes – oversimplified ideas of the way people should be.
Recall how television program Masterchef promoted its 2013 series as a “battle of the sexes”. The women wore pink and men blue. They trash-talked one another with a litany of stereotypes: “men are more experimental!”, “women can multitask!”.

Critically, most creative work in agencies has historically been led and shaped by men using hypermasculinity as a model for creativity. One study has likened agency cultures to locker rooms – intensely competitive, structured by male bonding and rife with sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination. As a result few women have been able to break into and succeed as creatives in advertising.

But this has begun to change, and the industry has started to face up to the problematic way in which advertising has reinforced gender stereotypes. There is increasing resistance to portrayals suggesting a single way to be a man or woman.

Last year the World Federation of Advertisers launched guidelines for progressive gender portrayals in advertising, namely unstereotyping ads, that highlights the importance of diverse teams and gender aware cultures. The Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) updated its Code of Ethics to state that gender-stereotypical roles and characteristics, such as a man doing DIY, must not suggest these are always associated with or carried out by that gender.

Gillette’s parent company Procter & Gamble, along with other multinationals heavily invested in gender-based marketing, has joined the Unstereotype Alliance, a United Nations-backed initiative to eradicate harmful gender-based stereotypes in advertising. Alliance members commit to creating content that depicts people as empowered actors, refraining from objectifying people and portraying progressive and multi-dimensional personalities.
 

Challenging toxic masculinity

Toxic masculinity refers to norms and ideals of manhood that are both constraining and harmful. It fosters rigid expectations that boys and men should be dominant, aggressive, stoic and devoid of emotion. It is instilled by telling boys to “toughen up” because “boys don’t cry”. It is contemptuous of men “acting like girls”. It is harmful to both men and women.

The director of Gillette’s new advertisement, Australian-born Kim Gehrig, is no stranger to this territory. Her short film You Think You’re a Man explores the cultural expectations of what it means to “be a man” in Australia.

But the backlash against her work for Procter & Gamble highlights the challenge of addressing masculine stereotypes. A core criticism is that it lacks the positivity of femvertising, such as the 2014 #LikeAGirl campaign for Procter & Gamble’s brand Always, which turned a phrase used to insult boys into an empowering message.

The LikeAGirl campaign.

Other brands marketed to male customers have managed to avoid criticism while dumping the toxic stereotypes they have previously peddled.

Unilever’s brand Lynx (also known as Axe) is a good example. It had a history of using sexual objectification in its advertising for men’s personal grooming products. In 2011 the British Advertising Standards Authority banned six of its adverts for being demeaning and offensive.

In 2016 it reformed its image with the #FindYourMagic campaign, which challenged narrow notions of masculinity.

Real men can love kittens: Lynx’s #FindYourMagic campaign challenged masculine stereotypes. Supplied

It followed up in 2017 with its #IsItokforGuys campaign that aired the private struggles men experience with the pressure to “be a man”.

The Australian soft-drink brand Solo, owned by Schweppes, is another example of marketers dropping their reliance on aggressively hyper-masculine stereotypes without backlash. In its recent A Thirsty Worthy Effort campaign, a man is no longer engaging in extreme sports to get an extreme thirst; he’s making a costume for his daughter’s school play.
 

Uncomfortable dialogue

Lynx celebrated men being themselves and unpacked unhealthy and narrow expressions of masculinity. Solo used humour to celebrate men taking an active role in domestic life. Where Gillette has dared to be different is in how the advertisement speaks to its male audience.

It directly and unflinchingly tells men how they should behave: do not bully, patronise, speak over, humiliate or sexually harass women. It tells men how they should treat one another. It challenges men to hold one another to account and set better role models for the “men of tomorrow”, cautioning that “the actions of the few can taint the reputation of the many”.

It shows the huge creative challenge the #metoo revolution poses to advertisers. How can you celebrate masculinity without addressing the toxic behaviours exposed by #metoo revelations?

Gillette’s commercial appropriation of #metoo may sit uncomfortably with some, but advertising is often at its most powerful when it captures the zeitgeist.

Encouraging men to call out how others behave around, speak about and treat women is critical in affecting change and advancing gender equality. Gillette’s statement reinforces this: “If we get people to pause, reflect and to challenge themselves and others to ensure that their actions reflect who they really are, then this campaign will be a success”.

Its approach to challenging male stereotypes and expectations has raised an uncomfortable and provoking dialogue. Representing men as vulnerable, kind, empathetic and modest in advertising is imperative if we are to move beyond the limited cultural portrayals that we often see of men. It is a step forward for an industry with a very chequered past.
 

Lauren Gurrieri, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, RMIT University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Gillette has it right: advertisers can’t just celebrate masculinity and ignore the #metoo movement appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Leader of the Commons Andrea Leadsom responds to questions about allegations sexual harassment at Westminster. Picture: PA. All rights reserved.

On 12 December 2018, the UK Prime Minister Theresa May faced a ‘vote of no confidence’ in her leadership. Her Conservative party MPs were invited to vote in a secret ballot, indicating whether they thought the prime minister should continue in her role. Conservative party rules stated that she would have to resign as party leader if she lost the vote.

May knew it was going to be a tight vote, as she needed the support of at least 159 out of 317 of her MPs to survive. The Conservative party then announced that two MPs who had previously been suspended following allegations of sexual harassment and abuse, Charlie Elphicke and Andrew Griffiths, would be reinstated ahead of the crucial vote.

Earlier this year, the Sunday Times newspaper revealed that Elphicke had been accused of rape by a former staff member. He had undergone a police interview under caution in March 2018, but no rape allegation was put to him on that occasion. Elphicke maintains his innocence and has denied any wrongdoing.

Griffiths had sent thousands of text messages to women in his constituency including explicit comments like his desire to “beat” a woman during sex. He subsequently said he’d sent these texts while having a manic episode, and that he was “ashamed and embarrassed”.

The Labour party criticised the Conservatives for “betraying” women by reinstating the suspended MPs ahead of the vote. A year after a series of #MeToo allegations broke in parliament, in late 2017, this welcoming back of alleged harassers for political expediency begs the question: what has changed for women in politics? And can this government be trusted to pay more than lip service to our rights when it’s political crunch time?

On 12 December 2018, the UK Prime Minister Theresa May faced a ‘vote of no confidence’ in her leadership. Her Conservative party MPs were invited to vote in a secret ballot, indicating whether they thought the prime minister should continue in her role. Conservative party rules stated that she would have to resign as party leader if she lost the vote.

May knew it was going to be a tight vote, as she needed the support of at least 159 out of 317 of her MPs to survive. The Conservative party then announced that two MPs who had previously been suspended following allegations of sexual harassment and abuse, Charlie Elphicke and Andrew Griffiths, would be reinstated ahead of the crucial vote.

Earlier this year, the Sunday Times newspaper revealed that Elphicke had been accused of rape by a former staff member. He had undergone a police interview under caution in March 2018, but no rape allegation was put to him on that occasion. Elphicke maintains his innocence and has denied any wrongdoing.

Griffiths had sent thousands of text messages to women in his constituency including explicit comments like his desire to “beat” a woman during sex. He subsequently said he’d sent these texts while having a manic episode, and that he was “ashamed and embarrassed”.

The Labour party criticised the Conservatives for “betraying” women by reinstating the suspended MPs ahead of the vote. A year after a series of #MeToo allegations broke in parliament, in late 2017, this welcoming back of alleged harassers for political expediency begs the question: what has changed for women in politics? And can this government be trusted to pay more than lip service to our rights when it’s political crunch time?
 

Abuse in the lobby

In October 2017, women around the world came forward under the MeToo banner, accusing powerful men of sexual assault, harassment and rape. From the Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein to news anchors, journalists, and Wall Street bosses, it wasn’t long before MeToo came to Westminster – the home of the UK parliament.

This year, a survey commissioned by MPs found one in five people working in parliament had experienced sexual harassment. Women reported twice as many cases as men.

Following disclosures of sexual harassment from the journalist Jane Merrick among other women, the defence secretary Sir Michael Fallon was the first to resign from his ministerial post, in November 2017, admitting his conduct may have “fallen short” of standards.

Sir Michael Fallon resigned from his UK cabinet position in 2017 following disclosures of sexual harassment. Image: PA. All rights reserved.

A few weeks later, the deputy prime minister Damian Green resigned amid allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards a young Conservative party activist (which he denied). A parliamentary inquiry had found these allegations “plausible” and that he’d previously made “misleading” statements about pornography on his work computer.

Over the last year, MPs, parliamentary staff, and activists from across parties have faced allegations of inappropriate behaviour, bullying, sexual assault, and rape.

The Financial Times journalist Laura Hughes exposed wide-ranging abuses of power at parliament. One parliamentary staff member anonymously told Hughes that a Conservative MP had boasted that he’d had sex with researchers on her desk. Another former staffer told Hughes that she knew of 10 women who had been harassed at parliament.

With two MPs resigning from ministerial posts (although not their seats), and other MPs and party activists under investigation or facing allegations of misconduct, it had become clear to parliament by the end of 2017 that action needed to be taken to change a culture of widespread bullying and harassment at the heart of British politics.

The extent of the Westminster abuse scandal was chilling. It’s precisely these people in these corridors of power who make laws about violence against women and workplace sexual harassment. How could these lawmakers be trusted to create fair and just policies to protect people from sexual violence, when some were alleged perpetrators themselves?

How could these lawmakers be trusted to create fair and just policies to protect people from sexual violence? 
 

The working group’s report introduced a new “behaviour code” for parliament, underpinned by an independent complaints procedure. It said that implementing this code would require training as well as human resources support, and called for a “cultural change” in parliament.

The code states that MPs and staff should “respect and value everyone”; that they should “recognise their power, influence or authority and not abuse them” and “think about how your behaviour affects others and strive to understand their perspective”.

“Bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct are not tolerated”, it insists. “Unacceptable behaviour will be dealt with seriously, independently and with effective sanctions”.

Importantly, the working group noted that sexual harassment is “qualitatively different from other forms of unacceptable behaviour, including bullying and non-sexual harassment”.

Confronting this “therefore requires its own set of procedures and personnel”, said its report, which recommended that an Independent Sexual Misconduct Advocate should be contracted to support those reporting harassment.
 

What’s really changed?

Can the government be trusted to put its own recommendations into practice? Or does the reinstatement of Elphicke and Griffiths, ahead of a crucial vote the prime minister needed to win, demonstrate that women’s rights are easily brushed aside when politics demand?

The reinstatement of these MPs isn’t the first example of political manoeuvering amid abuse allegations. Earlier this year, bullying allegations against the speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, were used as political footballs by his opponents and supporters.

In an article for the Guardian, a Labour MP wrote that many of her fellow parliamentarians “hate John Bercow and wanted rid of him and used the report as their opportunity”. They see victims of harassment as a “toy for them to play with for political and tribal ends”, she said.
Meanwhile, those who wanted Bercow to stay called it the “wrong time” to change speaker.They see victims of harassment as a “toy for them to play with for political and tribal ends”.

Accusations of sexual misconduct have also rocked parliament’s House of Lords.

In November 2017, the Liberal Democrat Peer and human rights lawyer, Lord Lester, was accused of sexual harassment by a women’s rights campaigner Jasvinder Sanghera. The House of Lords Commissioner for Standards conducted an investigation, upheld her complaint, and determined that Lester should be suspended for five years.

However, on 15 November 2018, Lester’s ally Lord Pannick voted to block the proposed suspension. Pannick accused the Commissioner of not acting “in accordance with the principles of natural justice and fairness” in her handling of the case.

In response, a House of Lords committee responsible for members’ privileges and conduct published a damning report on 12 December on how Lester’s case had been handled. Among other things, it expressed concern that the debate over Pannick’s amendment risked putting other women off reporting sexual misconduct in the future.

The report noted how during the debate, Lester’s supporters used their positions to “make wholly inappropriate comments about [Sanghera’s] character and behaviour”. It said: “We are concerned that some of the contributions to the debate will have deterred other victims of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct from coming forward”.

One of the report’s footnotes adds that the committee’s “attention [was drawn] to the fact that in the debate on 15 November, ‘reputation’ was invoked positively 15 times to describe Lord Lester. It was not invoked once to describe the complainant. At the same time, the complainant’s credibility and motivations were questioned”.

This is important – so often in these cases, while men’s reputations are defended, women are deemed to lack credibility, or accused of having ulterior motivations. This obstructs women’s access to justice and can put women off reporting sexual misconduct or violence.  

Sanghera said that the investigation against Lord Lester had been thorough, and by blocking his suspension the House of Lords “undermined the whole process, and undermined the commissioner and me”. It also “undermined victims”, she added, saying that she wouldn’t advise other women to report cases of harassment if this is how they respond.

Lester did eventually resign, though he maintains his innocence. A further debate on 17 December censured him – but as he had already resigned, he cannot face any sanctions in parliament. Meanwhile, Lester’s is not an isolated case. Rather it typifies the problems women face when reporting sexual misconduct against powerful men in government.
 

What’s next?

From reinstating MPs ahead of a crucial vote, to treating bullying allegations against Bercow as a political football, the UK parliament has not inspired much confidence in its ability to seriously handle accusations of misconduct and abuse.

Although two men did resign their ministerial posts following accusations of sexual harassment, they have remained MPs. One wonders what Sir Michael Fallon’s constituents make of his admission that his conduct may have “fallen short” of standards as defence secretary, while apparently deciding that he was still suitable to represent them.

The case of Lord Lester meanwhile highlights how the way sexual harassment claims are handled may influence whether other women will report cases in the future.

While it is positive that new complaints procedures are now in place at parliament – thanks in part to the work of feminist campaigners – if women do not believe their allegations will be listened to and respected, then many still won’t come forward.

Going into 2019, it remains alarming that those responsible for making laws on issues like violence against women and girls seem unable to deal with them in their own workplace.

Sian Norris is a writer and feminist activist. She is the founder and director of the Bristol Women’s Literature Festival, and runs the successful feminist blog sianandcrookedrib.blogspot.com. She has written for the Guardian, the Independent, the New Statesman. Her first novel, Greta and Boris: A Daring Rescue is published by Our Street and her short story, The Boys on the Bus, is available on the Kindle. Sian is currently working on a novel based around the life of Gertrude Stein. 
 

The post After Me Too, can we trust the UK government to tackle sexual abuse? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Students celebrating International Women’s Day. Kolkata, 2017. Photo: Saikat Paul/Zuma Press/PA Images. All rights reserved.

This year, I’ve been a part of the Me Too revival in India, having joined countless other women in naming and shaming our abusers.

Like many Indian feminists, I’ve found the past few months exhilarating. Our gutsy movement might finally rewrite entrenched patriarchal norms, at least in workplaces. A government minister resigned, a Bollywood production house shut down, senior newspaper editors stepped down, a millionaire casting director was sacked, academics were let go from universities – and the list of major impacts continues with fresh allegations still unfolding.

Attempts in 2017 to ignite a Me Too movement in India were nowhere near as effective. These began in October 2017, shortly after the Harvey Weinstein scandal broke in the US, and scores of women drew attention to the scale of sexual abuse with #MeToo posts on social media. That month, an Indian law student at the University of California Davis, released a list on Facebook with names of senior academics accused of sexual harassment.
 

The LoSHA list

Raya Sarkar’s LoSHA (List of Sexual Harassers in Academia, as it came to be known on Twitter) left many feminists uncomfortable, including myself.

It was a crowd-sourced list – an open Google spreadsheet, which could be edited by anyone with the link. It named perpetrators in one column and survivors in another, but in almost all cases it lacked details of specific allegations. In principle, its open-access structure also meant that anyone could add a survivor’s name to the list, even without their consent.

Not only did the alleged perpetrators not face any legal actions or university sanctions, some of the renowned academics named on the list even garnered sympathy: it was seen to violate their rights to due process. The Me Too movement in India failed to gain traction and eventually dissipated.

What’s different this year? Many feminists have contended that Me Too allegations by Indian women weren’t taken seriously by the press or the public in 2017 because Dalit women, like Sarkar, led the campaigns. In contrast, women steering the 2018 movement are from influential castes.

Dalits are historically oppressed castes. A Dalit woman who names her abuser is more likely to face social ostracisation, disbelief and stigma. But Sarkar’s 2017 LoSHA was vital. It laid the groundwork for this year’s advances. For many of us who outed perpetrators of abuse and harassment in 2018, it showed us precisely the landmines to steer clear of.

“It showed us precisely the landmines to steer clear of”

This year’s movement began in September, when a Bollywood actor alleged that a senior male colleague had sexually harassed her in 2008. Soon after, allegations of abuse surfaced among well-known stand-up comedians.

The first few women who named perpetrators on social media were inundated with private messages from other women detailing their own experiences of harassment and assault. Some remained anonymous; others wanted their stories to be public. The women receiving these waves of allegations became ‘gatekeepers’ for the Me Too revival.

This is a crucial cog that was missing in 2017’s LoSHA campaign. This loose collective of gatekeepers spend time talking to survivors and learning more details of the time, place and nature of abuse before outing perpetrators. They ensure that survivors are not re-traumatised, but that their stories have enough details that other people can corroborate them.    

Producer Vinta Nanda at a press conference discussing Me Too. Mumbai, 2018. Photo: Hindustan Times/SIPA USA/PA Images. All rights reserved.

This time, the only Google spreadsheet is a list of lawyers and mental health professionals who have volunteered time and services to support survivors.

Another crucial difference in the ‘second wave’ of this movement is the larger number of women who have mustered-up the courage to name their abusers and harassers. Thanks to Sarkar’s work last year, the burden of stigma had already started to shift onto perpetrators. The first disruption was necessary for the second to make strides forward. LoSHA loosened the lid of the bottle.

“This time, the only Google spreadsheet is a list of lawyers and mental health professionals who volunteered to support survivors”

In October 2018, Mobashar Jawed Akbar, a former leading newspaper editor, resigned from his post as a junior foreign minister after 27 women accused him of sexual harassment. More than half of these women were not anonymous. (Akbar denied all allegations and filed an ongoing defamation case against the first woman to accuse him).

More women are outing perpetrators online, but the Me Too movement in India is also pursuing court cases and knocking on the doors of Internal Complaints Committees at their workplaces. More than 20 women have also pledged to testify in court against Akbar, for example.
The 2017 LoSHA list was criticised for not following “due process” regarding alleged perpetrators. But this “due process” emphasis is also insufficient, too narrowly defining what justice looks like for survivors, and incorrectly assuming it means the same thing for all women. This year, many survivors have come forward about their experiences explicitly stating that they do not want to pursue legal cases. Some only want an apology, or their jobs back.
 

The POSH Act

In 2013, India’s parliament passed the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, also known as the POSH Act. But its implementation has been negligible. The Me Too movement’s current wave has pushed from its start for this to change – via Twitter and public statements, letters and petitions to government authorities.

In response, on 24 October the government convened a group of ministers, headed by home minister Rajnath Singh, to examine legal and institutional frameworks for dealing with workplace sexual harassment. The National Commission for Women also reached out to several women on Twitter and accepted their petitions, promising to take action.

This may be nothing more than lip-service. But recent supreme court verdicts decriminalising homosexuality and allowing menstruating women into shrines suggest those in power are finally taking gender equality seriously. Though there are still many pressing questions.
Many of the men who have been accused of harassment or assault in both waves of the Me Too movement in India are powerful, yet supposedly progressive, figures the media industry. What made these ‘liberal’ men ignore the basic principle of consent in their own workplaces?
“What made ‘liberal’ men ignore the basic principle of consent in their own workplaces?”

For decades, the veteran broadcast journalist and editor Vinod Dua has criticised religious inequality, caste-based discrimination and undemocratic processes in India. He too has been accused by multiple women of sexual harassment. He has denied all charges.
Criticising government politics or social norms was easier for these men than looking critically at their own behavior, practices and thoughts. These men were not taught how not to be abusive, while women were told to be always on guard. These men could transgress accepted social boundaries, while women had to tolerate abuse today for the promise of a better tomorrow.

Women’s spaces, whether community spaces or friendship networks, have always had their whisper networks. Me Too campaigns have dared to share these online, using social media to alter the social order. Of course, centuries of entrenched patriarchy cannot be upturned in a month. But this country finally looks ready for a feminist overhaul.

Raksha Kumar is an independent journalist, writing on human rights, gender and politics. She has reported for the New York Times, Al Jazeera America, The Guardian, TIME magazine, Christian Science Monitor, DAWN, Caravan, The Hindu and South China Morning Post. Follow her on twitter @Raksha_Kumar.

Courtesy: https://www.opendemocracy.net/
 

The post Why the ‘Me Too’ movement in India is succeeding at last appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Therefore the news of Sotheby India’s MD Gaurav Bhatia’s caught in the # Me Too accusations are both disturbing and gratifying. The former because of the 18 year old who was subjected to a nightmare, pounced upon without solicitation ,grabbed and groped and forced into a servile position that left him “shocked and scared”. Such incidents are physically exhausting and mentally daunting not just for the victim but those well outside it, the audience. Assuredly the boy will need many years before he can come to grips with the experience. If he is lucky, well , he might be able to heal without the scars constantly simmering beneath the conscious and well adjusted façade. In case he isn’t quite that fortunate, he will join the ranks of those scores of people across the world who grapple with such violent and abusive experience without a time- space limit.

Women have largely formed a big part of those abused, sexually or otherwise. At some level the calling off of Gaurav Bhatia’s deplorable behaviour may have turned the entire movement towards a wider intellectual space. For one, it’s no more limited to gender, cases specifically of women assaulted by men in positions of definite power and authority. This accusation has taken the # Me Too scene beyond its restrictive confines although gender continues to be a major part of the discourse and debate. As Mr. Bhatia goes off unceremoniously on leave, the debate finally opens into its logical text -the ambit of Perpetrator vs Victim. The emphasis on gender was in a way diluting the fight. Now the spotlight seems to be back on the psychology of the person in power/ authority  who thinks it is quite within acceptable behaviour to ask an employee for sexual favours and if denied make things undeniably stifling.

Feminism, while taking up the fight for women for equality and empowerment is ultimately subsumed into the scores of movements that are against discriminatory practices, like casteism or racism. Of course millions do believe that equality between genders, all genders,  must be a part of our daily intellectual engagement, yet many find the word ‘feminism’ disturbing or overwhelming. Semantics be put aside, women’s issues need to be accorded the same importance as caste or class or race. Those who oppose the word and its representations often have never faced instances of discrimination in their personal lives or have been socialised so thoroughly that the awning gender divide seems like a piece of fiction. Patriarchy has deeper roots than one believes and the recent ugly accusations levelled against some women who have  blown a whistle on their perpetrators are indeed unhappy proof. The adjective ‘ patriarchy’ stands for a culture that believes in systematised hegemony and in India which also has a thriving caste- class structure, it is also deeply hierarchical. So a Dalit women faces the double disadvantage of gender and caste and her position is often the saddest. The # Me too gave some teeth to women, albeit those in a certain strata.

As stories of varying degrees of predatory behaviour came out, the world at large woke up to just how unsafe the workplace was. And as accounts and skeletons tumbled out a sense of victimhood overcame the majority. Denials by men, threats and emphatic arguments followed. This was also followed by a systematic effort to defame the women involved, the easiest method being to attack her character and make question her climb to the top. “ He did help her gain ground at the workplace, so why complain about it after so many years”. Collective consciousness is outraged. The moot point is why question the timing and the women’s credentials. Why not keep the conversation and the enquiry limited to the act of forcing a human into a position which compromises personal safety and mental sanity. This is where Gaurav Bhatia has contributed to the conversation. It does not matter whether he is found guilty or acquitted. The very allegations have contributed to the # Me Too. No more is the movement about man vs woman. Rather it is about a human who belittles rules of civilised society and strips the other of dignity. Yes, this is finally about dignity and respect, for one never forces those we respect or value into such  cramped hell holes of subjugation and exploitation.

Saonli Hazra is an educator and free lance writer.

Courtesy: https://countercurrents.org/
 

The post #MeToo-The Widening Discourse appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The UGM rape case is a reminder that our priority should be to stand with the survivors of sexual assault. www.shutterstock.com

In the US, victims’ testimonies have brought down powerful men and introduced new corporate norms rejecting sexual assault. But in Indonesia the women’s testimonies have criminalised them as victim blaming is still pervasive.

The media play a role in both exposing and reinforcing such culture.
 

Blaming the victim

The UGM rape case went public after UGM’s student press, Balairung, published a report. Balairung reported that Agni (not her real name) was sexually assaulted by a fellow student identified as HS during a community service program for college credit at a village on Seram Island in the Moluccas.

They interviewed Agni and reported in detail on the university’s response to her report. Following her report of rape, her alleged abuser was taken out of the program, while she continued. However, she was given a low mark. The campus representatives blamed her for being “reckless”, hence contributing to the incident, as well as embarrassing UGM in front of local villagers.

Balairung quoted one of the female supervisors saying: “If you didn’t sleep in the same room as him, this would have never happened.” A male official suggested we should not be in a rush to call Agni a “victim”, saying:
 

Like a cat given salted fish, it will at least sniff it and might even eat the fish.

Meanwhile, in Lombok, Baiq Nuril, a teacher who recorded a phone conversation between her and the headteacher, as evidence of unwanted sexual advances, has been sentenced to six months in jail and a fine of Rp500 million. She was found guilty of recording and spreading indecent material under Indonesia’s electronic information and transactions law.

This case is just the tip of the iceberg on the prevalence of victim-blaming culture in our society.

The culture is so rampant that many rape survivors are afraid to report the case because of the risk that they could be criminalised for reporting their abuse.
 

The role of media

Victim blaming is an attitude of putting the blame on women for the abuse they experience. It also takes the side of the perpetrators and accepts their side of stories.

By engaging in victim-blaming attitudes, society accuses women of being somehow responsible for sexual abuse. Such an attitude also tolerates the assaults and allows the abusers to escape punishment.

The pervasiveness of victim blaming in Indonesia is strongly influenced by a patriarchal culture, based on an ideology of hierarchical relations between women and men. Under patriarchy the position of men is more dominant and more influential. Women are subordinates. As a result, men demand respect and obedience from women to a certain extent.

News media play a role in combating victim-blaming culture. Media are the primary source to inform how society understands violence against women and girls. Media in this case help victims to be heard. The Balairung‘s exposé of the UGM rape case, for instance, helps draw public attention to it.

However, media coverage can also reinforce victim-blaming attitudes due to the media tendency to represent women as victims, instead of survivors, and associate them with their lack of power. Media also tend to blame women in reports on sexual abuse.

Research on sexual attacks against Chinese descendants during the Indonesian political transition in May 1998, by Susan Blackburn from Monash University, Australia, highlighted the Indonesian media’s role in spreading the victim-blaming practice. She found that media often framed that rapes occurred because women provoked uncontrollable male sexual urges with their “provocative” and “sensual” clothing. In other words, the media said it was women who were inviting rape.

The victim-blaming attitudes in patriarchal society have made the survivors of sexual violence suffer from double victimisation: being raped and being blamed. This results in them not feeling safe in sharing their stories with others.

Victim blaming can also have another negative consequence.

A study by Indonesian sociologist Ariel Heryanto of Chinese female descendants who were raped and sexually abused in 1998 found that many of them chose to run away from home and attempt to lead a new life in a distant place due to trauma and fear of stigmatisation. Many others try to overcome the trauma by forgetting the violence, or denying that the sexual violence occurred. As a result, it is still difficult to obtain facts and justice related to the 1998 rape cases.

The patriarchal environment also reinforces the rape culture that perpetuates victim-blaming attitudes. Rape culture is defined as an environment that tolerates rape and sexual violence.

This culture is preserved through the use of sexist language, the objectification of women’s bodies, body shaming of women and the use of sexually explicit jokes. It creates a society that disregards women’s rights and safety.
 

Defending survivors

The UGM rape case is a reminder to us that, in every case of rape, our priority should be to stand with the survivors. Public support for Baiq Nuril from Lombok should also trigger reform in law enforcement and the judiciary to protect victims of sexual abuse.

Given that the victim blaming and rape culture are a persistent problem in our society, we should consistently fight against any kind of violence against women and girls. We must stand by the survivors every time, and not only when their cases generate a public outcry. We can start by respecting any kind of clothing they wear.
 

Iwan Awaluddin Yusuf, Lecturer in Department of Communications, Universitas Islam Indonesia (UII)

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Victim-blaming culture holds back #MeToo in Indonesia appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Current MeToo movement in India has exposed a few and frightened many. While there are still a very small number of women who have come up with their MeToo stories, a disturbing countertrend has emerged. Many people are trying to project the movement as against the whole Men Community. And on the social media platforms, jokes about the MeToo are trending innumerable times more than the movement itself. Where the first could be seen as a deliberate attempt to dissolve the movement which can perhaps unmask many predators; latter countertrend is definitely careless and insensitive as it normalizes the sexual assault. There are also a band of people who are trying to discredit the movement as an imitation of a similar movement in the west (which according to them) is arising not of genuine quest of change but out of inferiority complex.  Besides being untrue, it is but pitiable that it doesn’t reduce the seriousness of it by an ounce. Much before MeToo started in the Hollywood, a small but similar series of event happened when a Malayalam actress was assaulted by a group of men allegedly hired by an actor Dileep. It only gained a momentum when Tanushree Dutta reinvigorated the debate when she repeated her 10 year old allegations of sexual assault against Nana Patekar. It is rather unsettling to know that she did so not to seek out justice from a hopeless system, except to make things clear from her side against the public slandering wetted out at her, for she was being asked about them in the interviews all the way in America.

What MeToo has brought in light is a pervasive nature of patriarchy and that is what makes it very important a movement. Women not only have an immense wage gap with men, they also have to go through string of abuses to get what is rightfully theirs. MeToo doesn’t include flirting and exchange of numbers as a form of sexual assault as some would like us to believe. MeToo may not even be about bringing the powers-that-be to justice for their crimes. It is about creating camaraderie amongst the survivors. It is about cautioning the young women entering the educational or professional fields about the preying men or just about the harsh reality of it. It is also, in parts, an attempt to scare the men that although they might not be brought to justice but would be shamed in public. It is a movement that seeks to question the whole system that infringes upon atleast four fundamental rights of women in general – right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, and right to constitutional remedies. It is also about questioning the conditioning that justifies the abuse to happen.

It is worthy to note a 2015 case in Australia in which an Indian man accused of stalking two women was able to escape the conviction by arguing that he was influenced by Bollywood movies. Should it really surprise us if India happens to be the most dangerous place for women? Misogynistic nature of Indian public is well displayed in its sex ratio (943 females on 1000 males). Reports suggest that every third woman in India has suffered sexual, physical (or both) violence at some point of her life and this comes out of paucity of data. It is imperative to note that both predators and survivors of these violence come from across political, religious, ideological, economical and professional lines. When women from positions and economically stable backgrounds come out with their stories, it not only shows just how much unsafe it is for them, it also hints at the larger picture of women from lower strata of the society. An NGO Sisters For Change has reported that around 60% of women have faced physical, verbal and sexual abuse in the factories. Many fear that the condition could be worse in the unorganized sector. Apart from violence, many women are often denied their wages in case any reporting of the violence is done. It explains the data from National Sample Survey Office [NSSO] which recounts the steep decline in Women’s Work participation in India. Between 1999-2000 (41.0%) and 2011-12 (32.2%) , around 21.46% of decline was observed, which particularly affected the rural women.

When people abuse the MeToo movement or make jokes about it, they automatically become complicit in the injustices being perpetrated against women. When women who have come out are called out Feminazis, it is nothing less than a vicious attempt at downplaying Nazism and vilification of justice seekers. It should be understood by all and especially those who say that MeToo shows the weakness of women, that it is not easy for anyone to come out no matter when they do; and it is equally challenging to recount the horror and to silently go through mental trauma of the abuse. It must also be understood that many women are still not able to come out for a variety of reasons and it in no way makes them coward.

Instead of cross-questioning the survivors or “alleged” survivors, real question should be asked from those who have been accused whether or not they have committed these heinous acts. It is not to suggest that all those who are accused are indeed complicit but in any conventional sense of justice, benefit of doubt should go to women because they are the ones who have been en-masse wronged against by every institutions for millennia. Ofcourse, no one should be convicted wrongly but to say that most women are abusing the movement for personal gains is destructive in nature.

Moreover, shouldn’t we as a society introspect ourselves for our fallacies? Shouldn’t we take a relook at all the conditioning that is done that legitimizes our misogyny? Shouldn’t film industry be held accountable for selling us the filth that legitimizes sexual assaults as fun? Shouldn’t we question the Superstars and singers for popularizing the songs that could easily be judged as disregarding the consent? Shouldn’t the questions be raised to those who hold sway about their silence and the reason of their aloofness from an issue that directly concerns half the humanity? MeToo may not solve the prevalent problem but it does raise many important questions.

Hanzala Aman is a political Columnist for HW News English. He has studied Agriculture Sciences and is currently pursuing M. Sc. Rural Technology and Development from the University of Allahabad. He freelances as a writer and translator.

Courtesy: https://countercurrents.org
 

The post MeToo India: A Small Step For A Long Way Ahead appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Whether the Sabrimala temple entry issue or the concerns relating to MeToo movement, the bureacratic as well as the legal system is failing to provide space to women to assert their rightsor to fight against the patriarchal forces. In the current regressive environment it is significant that women’s agency and choices find space and the movement such as MeToo facilitate such informal support system and provide a platform where women’s voices could be raised. It is different from the top-down campaigns initiated by the State and aims to change men’s behaviour rather than expecting women to learn to deal with violence committed by men. Such movements have potential to change the notion of sex, power and consent in a male-doimnated society. MeToo is about women making space in a toxic male-dominated work environment. The need is to expand and strengthen this movement further.

Violence is Pervasive
Violence against women and more particularly, sexual harassment is pervasive in public as well as in private spaces. Women in patriarchal society are being harassed everyday in one form or the other at the public places. They are being stalked, groped,bullied, flirted with, are targetted with unwanted jokes, lewd comments are being passed so on and so forth, many forms of unwanted harassment takes place day in and day out where perpetrator could be a stranger or an acquaintance.

Frequently, in the post-colonial India, when women because of their newly founded education and aspiration are venturing out to work, in a polarised, layered, hierarchical society, men could not accept the fact that women are asserting for equality or are competing with them. When on the one hand women are struggling to forge a new identity of their own, men are not ready or willing to create space for women. The patriarchal attitude still considers women as someone secondary’ as anappendage’ to men and is someone who could not fit into the male dominated workspaces. Women are therefore not being treated as colleagues’ orpartners’ in workplaces. The `old-boys’ network continue to prevail. Violence against women at the workplace arise the due to such culture where sexism and misogyny operate to subjugate women.
Irony is that at the work place, it is not the perpertrators who were told to stop rather it is the victims who are being told “not to make harassment an issue” in order to preserve their careers and reputations. Paradoxical is that it is not the perpetrators that are being shamed for their violent actions rather for years women victims and survivors have been stigmatised and are forced to face the wrath of the society. The feudal conservative patriarchal mindset of the society makes joke about women and takes women’s concern in a non-serious manner as often narcissistic men cannot tolerate women competing with women. The culture of silence is build around the violence which prevents many women to lodge their complaint. Often, cases are brushed under the carpet creating a culture of complicity. MeToo is against this culture of silencing women.

And more specifically in cases relating to sexual harassment at work place, women earlier had no distinct platform until the Supreme Court pronounced the guidelines in the matter of Vishakha versus the State of Rajasthan[1]. The Prevention of Women Against Sexual Harassment Act was enacted only in 2013 after much pressure and sustained camapign by the progressive women’s movement. Yet, still, any act of violence against women are not being taken seriously even by the law makers and implementers. Accusing the victim or victim blaming is a common practice which is being used even by the legal system to crush the voices of women[2]. The police stations and courts are hostile to women victims and survivors. The delay and the struggle in the adjudication in the matter relating to Rupen Deol Bajaj versus KPS Gill[3] is a perfect example as to how even the educated urban working women have to face a long challenging battle to obtain justice. Many of such cases show that the legal system has failed women and that the culture of violence with impunity is prevalent inside and outside the court rooms.
Though the laws have been enacted, yet the perpetrators of violence often go scot free. The patriarchal courts are much more sympathetic to male perpetrators of violence and used to find technical faults or procedural lacunae to support the accused persons[4]. In fact, the legal system is geared to cater to the whims of patriarchy. From the famous Mathura rape case[5] to Bhanwari Devi’s rape matter and the judgement delivered by the High court and the Supreme Court in the Farooqui rape case[6], all depict that the regressive patriarchy is intensly ingrained and deeply embedded. At times, instead of penalizing the abuser, the process of trial in the courts becomes another process of victimization of victims of crime.

Experiences, for years, show that coming out with the complain against powerful abusive men is not an easy process. In fact, a recent survey shows that 78 percent women who face sexual harassment at work place did not report it[7]. The data further shows that only 6.6 percent sexual harassment cases filed resulted in conviction. In the year 2016, there were 34,186 cases were filed of which police compleited investigation in 75 percent cases and filed chargesheet in filed in 67.3 percent cases sent for trial[8].

Patriarchy is Rampant
Often men or even the androcentric courts do not see women as consenting adults or persons with self-contained being adorned with rights as citizens. For men, it is difficult to understand the concept of consent. In fact, sexual assault or rape has been used as a weapons since ages to control, conquer and terrorize women. Susan Brownmiller in her famous work titled “Against Our Will”[9] has argued that rape “is nothing more or less than the conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear”. Brownmiller opined that rape is primeval and ultimate act of subjugation where the rapist asserts his power with the urge to dominate.

Sexual assault is a weapon of force and an act of dominance, a principal agent of man’s will and a woman’s fear, a triumph of manhood and is easier to commit in situations where the aggressor has an advantage which persists due to structural domination such as feudalism, slavery, work, war or in custody situations where the victim could hardly resist and is overawed by the power and authority of the assaulter. Power is utilized or rather abused to create terror. Toxic masculinity is used as a weapon to humiliate the women – the vulnerable and the weak[10]. Sexual assault is being used as a means of suppression as well as fordepicting power and supremacy. Men believe that they can do anything and can get away with it.Often, men believe that they are over and above the law. The institutions frequently support the predators and there is little women can do about it.

Breaking the Culture of Silence Around Violence
However, the movements such as Me_too are paving the way for the new hope to make a dent on the patriarchal, violent and androcentric culture which portrays perpetrators of violence as heros and celebrate the culture of silencing victims and shaming women. Me_Too is not a legal recourse of action but it is an action beyond law into the social realm anda complement to the legal process as it provides a platform where women can garner support from others against the powerful predators making the perpetrator accountable. Women no longer need to suffer silently or be told to keep quiet about the violence they have been facing in public or private spaces.

Initiated in 2006 by Black feminist activist Tarana Burke while she was working with poor Black young girls and women who were victims of sexual assault, this hashtag was used by Hollywood heroine Alyssa Milanoin 2017 when while sharing her own traumatic experience she invited other women to share their experiences openly on a public platform. This movement exposed many high profile educated people who were found to be involved in crime against women. It has shown that the power imbalance is universal and ubiquotous phenomenon.
Though it is a well known fact that men, poor or rich sexually assault women, but such action on the part of women to make noise about this issue made a dent on fragile toxic masculinity. Despite of the fact that the movement cannot stop the abuser to occupy the position of power in the US yet it created a storm and spread like a wild fire across various countries.

In India, in the year 2017 a list was posted on the social media by several women which was dumped as the vague list of allegations, however, in September 2018 one of the Bollywood actress posted her experiences of sexual assault and later several other too joined her. This movement exposed several well known names in the television and the film industry and later several journalists too shared their stories which revealed the manner in which the people in position of power abuse women and treat them as an object rather than as a human being.

One of the striking feature of MeToo movement is that women survivors have shown courage to come out openly and narrate their experiences while naming and shaming the harassers and bringing the incident under public scrutiny. Women are taking stand against the harassement they have faced and these survivors have shed the veil of anonymity while defying the stigma. This bold act to defy the power structure and dynamics by a woman against powerful men who were in position to harass and humiliate is encouraging other women too thus challenging the age-old power balance.The testimonies of women have opened the possibilities of debate and discussion around the issue of violence against women in the suffocating patriarchal environment.  This movement is not only confined to elite sections of the society as alleged during its initial phase but it is reaching out and making impact in the far flung areas too[11].

The movement has send a strong message to the predatory male bosses, supervisors or pesky colleagues in the position of power and privilege who could not comprehend the meaning of word `consent’ or refuse to acknowledge the fact that women are to be respected as human beings. It is an innovative way to create space in the work spaces dominated by men. Men now need to think before making any vulgar untoward advances toward the female working under them and to control their libidos or the surge of the testosterone. MeToo movement has the potential to raise the consciousness regarding the notions of sex, power and consent in a conservative society. The movement is against the toxic oppressive environment and it has succedeed in placing onus on men for their actions of harassment. Over and above caste or class biases, this movement is more about gender equality and empowerment at the work spaces or the public places where men need to learn, un-learn and re-learn their behaviour towards women.

There are Many Untold Hidden Stories
MeToo in its present from represent only a tip of an iceberg. There are many hidden untold stories underneath in the deep dark corners. As women, many of us face violence on daily basis in public and private spaces. Those experiences have a cumulative effect on our being. Yet, only few narratives came out. Being on the sexual harassment committees and handling cases of women survivors of violence as a lawyer, I could connect the dots between many told and untold stories and could realize that it is not easy for women to bring up the cases against men easily in the public domain.

Yet, MeToo as such as has shaken the patriarchy to its core. MeToo is hurting the fragile toxic masculine ego. Many women are being trolled for coming out with the truth. In the culture where rape jokes, slut shaming and victim shaming is normalized and legitimized, this spur of a onslaught where women vocalised their traumatic experiences is felt as a jolt by men. Many men struggled to understand the concept of consent. Men could not understand this form of female uprising. For them it is inversion of power structure as they imagined a world in which women rule as men have ruled the women.

MeToo is a powerful collective voice of women against the patriarchal subjugation. Reading it as a ploy to point finger at one man or that it is subjective or any other form of backlash implies surrendering to the dictates of patriarchy because any form of violence against women cannot be seen as a man versus a woman issue. In the larger context, violence is a patriarchal issue.

Me_Too is Not a Man versus a Women Issue It is Women Versus Patriarchy
The response of media as well as of society towards the MeToo movement is divided. Many of those men and women, who express their opinion on the social media sites view MeToo as a man versus a woman issue. What is ignored while polarising MeToo as a man versus a woman issue is that this movement is not against a person by another rather it has to larger ramifications and has to be understood in the larger context. The need is to recognize the fact that any form of violence against women is embedded in patriarchal structure. It is in this male-dominated context that women are not alllowed to speak against violence or their voices are stuffled in case they dare to do so. Patriarchal conditioning is such that women are being trained to imbibe the culture of silence and tolerate violence. Me Too challenges this powerful dominating patriarchal violent structure.

Critiques of the Movement
Though several of the critics suggested that such public trials are devoid of procedural fairness and violate the basic sense of fair play, yet one of the advantage of such action is potential to change the prevalent culture of maintaining silence around the violence and to express anger, resentmentand frustration in the public domain. This expression of anger is significant as this is an anger which is expressed without any regret or repentance for being wronged, anger which has been boiling and bottled up for years and anger which could not find any other escape because there is no outlet.

Earlier, the frustrations of internalizing patriarchy or to submit to androcentric authority has no platform where it could be vent out without paying the heavy cost in terms of losing the job. But perhaps, now a platform is being made available. Though not many women feel comfortable using social media to vent out their anger against predatory colleagues or harrasers and those who tried are dubbed as trouble makers[12], yet there exist a possibility of sharing stories and garnering support.

This movement has to be seen in the wider context as it is not subscribing to the actions relating to unduly terminating someone from his job, lynching the person, or to subscribe to the undesirable or inappropriate media trial, yet such exposures could help make the dent on patriarchal violent culture. This is more about providing platform to the survivors to raise their concerns in a secure environment where the victim does not face insecurity of being a victim. Though here some of the disclosures by women of their traumatic experiences which they have been suppressing for years have resulted in apologies, resignations and initiating inquiries against the accused persons yet this movement has helped in creating an environment for debate and discussion around the issue of women’s consent and appropriate behaviour as well as respect towards women.

The Due Process Has to be Fair
The critics of the MeToo movement argued that the due process is not being followed in all such cases. However, what is overlooked is the fact that the due process requires certain basic set of principles to be followed by both the parties. It cannot be  imposed unjustly on the vulnerable party in order to favour the powerful one.

Today, in situations when the powerful parties are playing the victim card trying to gain all the advantages it will be unfair to suppress the victims and survivors in such situations. For instance, in the given instance when around20 women spoke out against the Union Minister MJ Akbar, he hired one of the law firm which intentionally filed the vakalatnama with the names of 97 lawyers mentioned on it to file the criminal defamation case against one of those women. This vakalatnama has been widely circrulated on the social media. The intention of such melodramatic strategy is to clearly intimidate and prevent other women to speak out. It is a routine practice where the brute display of power is used within and outside the court room which the powerful perpetrators abuse their muscle and money power against the vulnerable victims. Criminal defamation law is used as a legalized weapon to the advantage of the perpetrator of the crime to silence and intimidate the women and to oppress the others.

In other cases too, such as the one against RK Pachauri, Phaneesh Murthy or Tarun Tejpal, or even when a judge is accused by a law intern and where all such accused personshave tried to delay the proceesings or manage the trial to their own gains, it is unfair that the survivor is being compelled to suffer because her case could not be fast-tracked because of the overburdened judicial system or because the courts and judiciary is patriarchal and masculine or because of any other lacunae in the legal system.

Not only in India, but at the global level, often, strategic legal weapons are used by the rich and powerful to inhibit public participation, threaten the parties, to delay and to make the litigants weary and withdraw the matter[13]. Strategic Law Against Public Participation or SLAPP suits are filed to deploy the forces of law to silence the victims and the witnesses. It is a form of backlash used by the powerful sexual predators to enforce the culture of sexual oppression in a deeply entrenched gender divide and misogyny. To address such situations and to make the criminal justice system more victim friendly there is a need to re-examine the working of the system.

State is a Complicit
Also, it has  been seen that the androcentric State often favours men.For instance, when this Me Too Movement started, the Ministry of External Affairs under which this Union Minister is working has not responded appropriately or issued any statement that an inquiry committee wil be established or any other step may be taken. Similarly, the Prime Minister who is known for his articulate skill of delivering speeches including Mann ki Baat and has not spoken a word on this issue[14]. In fact, the brazen arrogant regime refused to initiate inquiry into the allegations and made futile attempt to turn it into an ugly political conspiracy issue[15].

Thus, it may be said that for ages, men have used all strategies and tactics to undermine the issue of sexual harassment and the state has been complicit in all such cases where women is victimized. Any voices raised are being hushed up using class, caste, gender, religion, or political ideology. The male sense of entitlement and supremacy is deeply entrenched that makes the culture toxic and when more and more women are entering the workplace, the fragile masculine ego is trembling with fear, because perhaps, for women the situation has changed but men need to undergo a massive reconstruction in terms of their understanding of the culture of respect for women[16].

The Moment in which the MeToo Movement Occur is Crucial
Further, the MeToo movement has been initiated during the period when the consevrative ideology is rising across the continents. In US as well as in many other countries including India, the right wing governments are at the center and pushing conservative set of beliefs. In India, the current government is pushing the Hindutva ideology that treat women as secondary citizens. Love-Jihad and other similar regressive measures are being adopted by the government to control and terrorise women[17].

The incidences of crime against women is on rise and rapes that took place in Kathua, Unnao or Mandsaur are reversing the gains made in the field of gender equality or empowerment. The girls in several schools, colleges and universities are raising their voices against the harsh rules and regulations being imposed on them. Raising voice against patriarchy during this period is crucial when a large number of girls and women are being raped, murdered and killed. The Hindu upper caste male supremacy is pushed while all other communities including women are being marginalized[18]. The culture of violence and hate is being created against those who are considered as `Others’. In such a climate when fascism is at its peak, any form of  resistance and defiance against conservative Brahaminical patriarchy become more significant to create spaces for democratic voices.

The conflict between the progressive and liberal ideas with that of regressive patriarchal values is making an adverse impact on the rights of women. This is evident in the matter relating to women’s entry into the Sabrimala temple where despite of the Supreme Court verdict to allow the females of any age to enter the place of worship, several right-wing protestors are not allowing women to enter the temple. The state, though duty bound, is seemingly surrendering before the powerful forces.

Whether the Sabrimala Temple entry issue or the concerns relating to MeToo movement, the bureaucratic as well as the legal system is failing to provide space to women to assert their rights. In such a regressive environment it is significant that women’s agency and choices find space and the movement such as Me_Too facilitate such informal support system and provide a platform where voices of women could be raised.

NO Means NO
The fight against misogyny needs to be fought at many fronts. MeToo has raised questions which are not addressed by law as yet. The law needs to provide solution for such issues. The law needs to classify different behaviours from sexual misconduct to sexual assault and is supposed to be amended to include punishments for such behaviours while dealing with the technicalities relating to limitations or the time in which one can report the cases under the law. Even otherwise, MeToo has raised a debate on general platforms about the new norms of behaviour. People are being forced to unlearn inherent patriarchal behaviour.

MeToo movement needs to be captured and expanded to travel to the small towns and villages where women could be encouraged to vocalize against the vast vulgar world of sexual exploitation which currently is going on unnoticed and unreported. Support groups need to formed at the local level where women in the moot corners may not feel isolated or alienated. The scope of MeToo movement could be enlarged so that it may outreach into the unorganized sector too besides enabling women in organized sector to raise their concerns and also from public life to private domains of home and from the circles of privileged classes to masses. This movement can raise the gender sensitivity and has the potential to spread the message that women’s consent is significant and that NO means NO.

MeToo Movement is the Revolutionary Measure Which can Bring the Desired Structural Changes
The Government of India had initiated Beti Bachao Beti Padhao movement, however the campaign could not succeed much as the crime against women increased since past four years. More girls and women are feeling unsafe probably because the top down campaign could not strike a deal with common people. But MeToo is a movement initiated by the survivors of violence, even though it has been said that these are mostly upper class elite educated women who are raising their concerns yet such approach could create more space for other women who may not have come forward to raise their voice.The focus on this movement is to raise consciousness and change the behaviour of men rather than forcing women to deal with the issue of violence or putting onus on women to learn techniques to avoid getting harassed.

MeToo is more about garnering friendship, solidarity, sisterhood, creating of such a large safe space that any survivor anywhere is able to speak up. It has forced the men to introspect their behaviour and to make women conscious of their rights.It is significant as it could bring change in the notions relating to sex power and consent within any relationship. This movement is a step towards the facilitating an environment where women’s rights, autonomy and dignity could be installed while enabling a gender sensitive environment within homes, workplaces or in public. Beyond social media or the courtrooms, the conversation has to be made at everyworkplace, public or private spaces to make dent on the structural patriarchal environment. MeToo shows that no power is absolute and that every change has a beginning.

The author is a practicing lawyer, researcher and an activist working in the field of gender, human rights, law and governance. She has written several books and articles and is handling cases pertaining to women’s rights, human rights and social justice. She may be contacted at shalu_nigam@rediffmail.com

Courtesy: https://countercurrents.org/

[1]Vishakha v State of Rajasthan AIR 1997 SC 3011
[2]Jaising Indira (2018) #Me Too has shown that the Indian Legal System Has Failed Indian Women, But There is a Way Forward, Bloomberg Quint, October 18, https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/metoo-shows-the-legal-system-has-failed-indian-women-but-there-is-a-way-forward#gs.GnKUtVY
[3] Rupan Deol Bajaj v KPS Gill 1996 AIR 309
[4]Nigam S (2017) Fighting for Justice in Patriarchal Courts, Countercurrents, August 30 https://countercurrents.org/2017/08/30/fighting-for-justice-in-the-patriarchal-courts/
[5]Tukaram v State of Maharashtra AIR 1979 SC 185 Also Open Letter to the Chief Justice of India, SCC 1979 1: 17
[6]Nigam S (2017) From Mathura to Farooqui Rape Case: The Regressive Patriarchy found Its Way Back, Countercurrents, October 9 https://countercurrents.org/2017/10/09/from-mathura-to-farooqui-rape-case-the-regressive-patriarchy-found-its-way-back/
[7]Dhingra Sanya (2018) 78% Indians Did Not report Sexual Harassment at Work Place When They Faced It: Survey, October 16 https://theprint.in/governance/78-indians-did-not-report-sexual-harassment-at-workplace-when-they-faced-it-survey/135274/
[8]The Times of India (2018) #MeToo: Only 6.6 percent Sexual Harassment Cases Resulted in Convictions,October 22, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/9-of-10-sexual-harassment-plaints-proven-to-be-true/articleshow/66310977.cms?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=TOIDesktop
[9] Brownmiller Susan (1975) Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, Fawcett Books, Random House, US
[10]Nigam S (2018) The cult of 56 Inches and Toxic Masculinity, Countercurrents June 23 https://countercurrents.org/2018/06/23/the-cult-of-56-inches-and-toxic-masculinity/
[11]Iyer A S (2018) #MeToo Reaches Rural India: `Men have Stopped Sending Us Porn, The Quint, October 19 https://www.thequint.com/news/india/me-too-sexual-harassment-rural-women-khabar-lahariya
[12]Dey A (2018) Why Women Beat Reporters are Apprehensive About joining MeToo Chorus, Scroll.in October 13, https://scroll.in/article/897798/why-women-beat-reporters-across-india-are-apprehensive-about-joining-metoo-chorus
[13]Chandra R (2018) MJ Akbar’s Defamation Case: From News Room to Court Room, the Game is Power, The Wire, October 18, https://thewire.in/law/m-j-akbars-defamation-case-from-news-room-to-court-room-the-game-is-the-same
[14]Singh DK (2018) MJ Akbarto Kathua: Decoding the Silence of Teflon Coated Modi, The Print October 16, https://theprint.in/opinion/m-j-akbar-to-kathua-decoding-the-silence-of-teflon-coated-narendra-modi/134574/
[15]Sharma B and Sethi A (2018) New Accuser Says MJ Akbar Harassed Her when she Was 18 Year Old Intern, Huff Post October 12, https://www.huffingtonpost.in/2018/10/12/new-accuser-says-mj-akbar-harassed-her-when-she-was-an-18-year-old-intern_a_23558579/
[16]Halarankar S (2018) My Wife Faces A Union Minister, His 97 Lawyers. It Takes Special Courage to Do That, The Scroll, October 16, https://scroll.in/article/898415/my-wife-faces-a-union-minister-his-97-lawyers-it-takes-special-courage-to-do-that
[17]Varma Subodh (2018) Savarkar’s Sanction to Use Rape as a Political Weapon, NewsClick April 16, https://www.newsclick.in/savarkars-sanction-use-rape-political-weapon
[18]Nigam S (2016) The Privileges of Being a Hindu Upper Caste and Elite Class Male in India, February 15, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2730525
 

The post #MeToo In India Is Just A Tip Of An Iceberg And It Has Shaken The Patriarchy To Its Core appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Google Trends is a handy data guide that helps people know about what is the current hot topic in your region or the world. What people could not have predicted is how it would show the reach of the #Metoo movement in India.
 

 
Watching the Me Too Rising, a Google Trends data visualisation tool created this April is a conundrum. India shines the brightest in the world with the reach of #Metoo. But should we be happy that the whole country is talking about it, sharing their stories of violations or be sad that women’s rights have been trampled upon unanimously in every corner of the country?
 
“The platform lights up the locations on a world map where the term “Me Too” is being searched for most frequently. The map doesn’t measure the total number of searches. Instead, it considers the number of times “Me Too” is locally searched compared to other phrases,” explained Quartz.
 
What it does do is shut up the critics of the movement. Many had dismissed the movement as an urban and elite gathering of well-heeled and educated women. The “top searching” cities and towns were relatively small compared to the mega-metropolises. early in the morning on Oct. 16, they top searchers were Goa’s Chicalim, Maharashtra’s Bhusawal, Punjab’s Zirakpur, and Chhattisgarh’s Bhanwreli and Rajnandgaon.
 
#Metoo has reached many smaller towns and cities. It is not an isolated event happening in the hubris of major cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Bengaluru.
 
What is different though is asserting the call for justice. While women in the cities have accused their abusers in open on social media, they have had support and do not fear retribution in the form of job loss. They are ready to fight that too as resources are available to them.
 
Regional media continues to struggle with sexual harassment at the workplace with caste and class coming to the fore and many other obstructions in empowering women to take on their harassers. Women journalists too have their share of trauma to share, which often times is much worse in a more rigid patriarchal structure.
 
New Indian Express spoke to law student Raya Sarkar, among the first women who began the #Metoo movement in India. She had published a crowd-sourced list naming alleged sexual harassers from the academic circle which came to be known as LoSHA. The movement had begun last year in October.
 
She hoped that the current movement could include Dalit, Bahujan and Adivasi women in it.  “Till now, the #MeToo movement in the country has been an urban phenomenon. Professionals who have been outed are mostly from English media houses, advertising companies, national NGOs and other bodies. Sarkar said, “I think it has potential to spread to regional spaces but frameworks do not exist to support and protect survivors there. Exposing a predator is more difficult when one does not have resources, aid or support systems to help and protect them in the aftermath,” she said.
 
She added that many feminists in India had denounced her move then but supported the current #metoo list. She attributed the invisibility and not being considered reliable to not being a “Bhramin Heterosexual.”
 
“Speaking to Express, Sarkar said, “Dalit, Bahujan and Adivasi (DBA) women have the least access to justice and often face intense hostility from the Savarna community when they attempt to take due process measures or expose predators. The movement does not represent DBA women yet. I hope as a community we can build more resources and support for the most vulnerable and marginalized. Any campaign should not treat the most vulnerable as just an afterthought.”
 
Tamil film star Siddharth spoke about how caste lines were obstructing women from opening up about their trauma in Tamil Nadu.

 
“Only in #TamilNadu #MeToo is being derailed with vicious lies about #caste. Dear dirty lying snakes, stop looking at the caste of the accuser or accused. Women from all castes are affected. Men from all castes are involved. This is #Survivor vs #Abuser. Puriyala? Vekka kedu!” he said.
 
“Unlike their national media counterparts, many women journalists at vernacular media houses in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala said they cannot even speak out about workplace harassment, let alone file formal complaints. In fact, barely any of these organisations has an internal complaints committee. Where it exists, it generally does not function,” wrote S Senthalir in Scroll.
 
“In South India, few women work in regional news organisations and fewer still in the print media. This makes it difficult for them to speak out. “They can’t afford to outrage,” said Kavitha Muralidharan, an independent journalist. “The moment a woman raises a complaint, she is branded a troublemaker.” They often do not even know what to do if they are sexually harassed by their “colleagues or seniors or while they are at work”, Muralidharan said, adding. “No training is given to them about what to do. There is a lack of awareness among young journalists,” he wrote.
 
He added, “In the Kannada media, many women are from rural and underprivileged backgrounds. This is partly why even senior journalists do not speak out against harassment, said DS Shamantha, president of the Sarathi Resource Centre for Community, which runs community radio stations in several parts of rural Karnataka. “In such circumstances, we cannot expect mid-level and junior women journalists to come forward to raise the issues,” she said.”
 
“In Andhra Pradesh, there are just two women reporters across 25 regional news organisations, said C Vanaja, an independent journalist and member of the Network for Women in Media. “The top three newspapers have internal complaints committees but there’s no system in place in other organisations for women to approach,” she added. “In most cases, women just leave their jobs when they are sexually harassed,” he wrote.
 
“It is not much different in the Malayalam media, said KK Shahina, associate editor with the Open magazine. Young women journalists are reluctant to talk about harassment for fear of being discriminated against and targeted. “The options for women working in regional media are limited,” she said. “Though women face sexual harassment at workplace, not many come out in Kerala. The state government has set up a panel to look into the problems of working women journalists,” he wrote.
 
Khabar Lahariya, a rural media organization has a network of all-women reports in up to eight districts of Uttar Pradesh. It had come out with its own share of #Metoo stories in 2014 through the magazine Zile ki Hulchul, published by the Women Media and News Trust. It had interviews of small town and rural women reporters.
 
Here’s what they wrote:
 
We know that this is risky business, speaking from the shadows, from the grave even. We’re not here, really. We’re not meant to be.
 
Yet, when the world outside is aflame, then how can we stay silent?
 
We want to add our stories of violence by you – our peers in journalism, our colleagues, bosses and rivals – to the stories that are proliferating, and ask you how things can change for us. With no laws or committees, no forums online or offline, no networks of power, and not even the beginnings of credibility when we begin to speak, will you admit to your wrongs? Or will you say, as you always have, that we shouldn’t be here in the first place, so why complain about it? The way you said on Facebook, ‘The next thing you know, Sunny Leone is going to say she was assaulted too.’
 
Will the thousands of brave women who have shared their stories amplify our quieter stories of everyday harassment too – so that you realize this will not be tolerated any more?
 
I trusted you, despite the rumours that flew wildly when we were seen together on your bike, when our selfies reached Facebook. But it became too much. The case of sexual assault I was able to file, miraculously, got you in jail for a brief period of time, but it has ruined my career. I have no colleagues, friends, family who stand by me. You are untarnished, and I have nothing. I am a Whatsapp joke to you now, you brag about the case I filed against you. People, including women in my profession, only say I got what was coming.
 
Our stories come from Aligarh, Mahoba, Banda, Chitrakoot, Guna, Meerut, Udaipur, Bhilwara, Samastipur, Rewa – no small town with a woman journalist lacks for these stories of battling sleaze and abuse, every single day. We have been told, again and again, until it rings in our heads, in our offices, outside the district headquarters, outside the police station, inside the police station: Why don’t you go into the beauty parlour business? Start a kirana store?Can’t you get a job as a teacher or nurse? Do you think you’re going to become a Collector? It’s not good for a woman like you to be roaming around all day in the hot sun. You should take care of how you look. Wear a bindi, and a sari. No sindoor? Oops, did we send you a ‘blue film’ by accident? Didn’t know there was a woman on this media group. Sorry madam, galti se chala gaya hoga.
 
The echoes of your taunts and laughter, your complicity with/in the system that wants us there, sharing space, sharing power, as little as you do – have forced us into shame, doubt and despair – even death.
 
There was a girl I knew… She was selected in [a major national daily]. Her in-charge was in Agra. Now I don’t know what her connection to Agra was, nor what their relationship was, but the in-charge was fired. The girl was kept on, but she was so stressed, I don’t know why, that she left and joined [another major Hindi daily]. This rumour flew around that the in-charge had misbehaved – aise dekh liya tha, vaise dekh liya tha (seen in her compromising positions). Her new in-charge then treated her so badly (itna shoshan kiya) that she became mentally disturbed. She was from Hathras, that girl.
 
Power works differently in our mohallas and galis and chaurahas. We live tightly bound to community structures – you are often our distant relatives, neighbours, watchdogs with deep interests in keeping us bound. Upper caste men aren’t too keen on watching girls from their community running around reporting. They like to keep them in check, like they can do with their daughters-in-law and their wives. Yet, despite the close distances, and with little knowledge of other women in other places, or the power of a hashtag, we have spoken and acted, using our voice and the broken tools of the law. It matters to us to speak, otherwise, why would we be breaking all barriers to do what we do? If we don’t call you out, you representatives of the fourth estate, then how will we call out any other wrongful use of power?
 
You stalked us, on the phone, on the streets of our own towns, driving close or stopping right in front of us, saying, with the lewdness dripping off your safas, ‘Come, let’s do some journalism together’. You’d rub up against us, in court, or at the site where a crime is being covered up, and slip notes into our hands, provoke, tease, humiliate us about not knowing how the game is played. You refused to comment on our best stories, claiming that it would set off rumours in the office of unprofessional behaviour.
 
You didn’t seem to think about unprofessional behaviour nor community mores when you were Whatsapp-ing us at midnight and commenting on our profile pictures and urging us to agree to rendezvous, which you wouldn’t entertain for your good wives and daughters. We filed complaints, were forced out of online spaces where we had just about made an entry, and for our efforts, got retaliatory FIRs from you, prohibitive fines, and permanent labels – the whore who dared to speak.
 
In the state capital, I went to the HR department in my newspaper’s office with my appointment letter. The person at the newspaper office told me to take a room in a hotel for the night and stay back and that he would come there and speak to me. When I flatly refused he told me, ‘Suno Madam, patrakaarita karna hai na to sab kuchh karna padega, hotel bhi jaana padega aur wahaan uthna baithna bhi padega (Listen, madam, if you want to work in journalism, you will have to do everything, you will have to go to hotels and do whatever is expected there too).’ I got very angry and tore up the appointment letter there and then and threw it at his face. I knew I had no access to the owner and his contemporaries would never stand up to him. In an office rarely do people like this stand up against one another. How long would I have fought with him given I was in another city?
 
We feel relief that there is a platform and a movement that promises to expose the abuse that keeps us tied down, under the control of a powerful structure. But there is a dark place in our minds where this relief refuses to reach – those of us who continue to fight, or those who have been defeated. The memory of a friend and colleague, a single woman trying to make it in the world of small-town journalism, and who was pushed into despair and a lonely death, only earlier this year, with no resonating cries off or online.
 
At the end of the day, our struggles are of lone women operating with few avenues to reach out, with little or no support structure to fall back on, at home or in the world. Whatever defense mechanisms we have, come from our own instincts, dressing down our personalities, keeping multiple SIM cards, or leaving a trail of breadcrumbs, creating our own informal networks for help when we’re in danger.
 
We’re saying #metoo, but we fear it isn’t enough to jolt you out of your comfortable place of power and entitlement or to provide us scaffolding when we are jolted out of the place we have created for ourselves.
 
Excerpted from Zile ki Hulchul (2014.)
 
 

The post #Metoo but my journalism is regional, does my pain still count? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Actions of individual women are a brave step forward, but a larger social movement is needed to bring justice for millions of not so privileged women.

 

The post After #MeToo: Legal System Needs Change appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In February last year, a Malayalam actress was abducted and molested by a group of men while returning from work. Following the police complaint she filed, the police found one of the leading Malayalam actor Dileep’s involvement in the abduction. WCC, a woman’s collective, was formed by a group of women from the Malayalam film industry last year after the fatal incident. One of the reasons behind the formation of this collective was to fight against discrimination women are subjected to by the powerful men of the industry.  The Indian Cultural Forum and Peoples Dispatch interviewed Bina Paul, an award winning film editor and an active member of WCC, about taking up struggles of women actors in the Malayalam film industry, AMMA and more. 

The Indian Cultural Forum and Peoples Dispatch interviewed Bina Paul, an award winning film editor and an active member of WCC, about taking up struggles of women actors in the Malayalam film industry, AMMA and more.

Indian Cultural Forum and Peoples Dispatch (ICF & PD): What is the ‘Women in Cinema Collective’ (WCC) and why do you think was it necessary to form such a collective?

Bina Paul (BP): Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), as the name suggests, is a collective of women in cinema. This collective is registered as part of a collective of women who are working in cinema. At the moment we are a core group of twenty women. This includes directors, assistant directors, technicians, artists, makeup artists etc.

The collective was started after an actress from the industry was abducted. While following the subsequent enquiry by the Kerala police, it was found that a colleague- actor was behind this incident. We were outraged at that moment and asked the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) to set up an enquiry on this matter as this incident happened between two colleagues belonging to the same fraternity. Our demands were not considered by the association and some of us decided to form a collective of women declaring our solidarity with the actress.
The conversation started when some of the female members in the film industry wanted to support the abducted actress for what she had gone through: molestation. While some of us were discussing this issue, we discovered that there are many larger issues within the film industry that come out of a lack of gender sensitivity and gender friendliness. Presently, sexual harassment is only one of the many problems in the industry. There is no system to redress if one has a complaint which is against the mandatory law that an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) must be set up in every field.

Another issue that we found was a lot of content and attitude problem. No one was listening or talking about such issues. The first thing that WCC did was to meet the Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan. We requested him to initiate a study on gender issues. The government has set up a high level committee to study on gender and the study is still going on. They are preparing a report on this issue by talking to people about the problems they face in their daily lives because no such study has taken place earlier. Meanwhile, we have been standing in solidarity with the actress. We had discussions with the Artists association and they wanted to take back the accused which we outrightly objected against. We sternly believe that it was unethical to take back the accused to the association.

WCC is presently trying to raise awareness on gender issues. It has widely opened doors for many to talk about gender. For example, we found out that till now no one had ever asked a woman about her experiences of menstruation. Do they have any provision for that? Not usually. No one will talk about it. Even when you are menstruating there are no toilets for you, and perhaps no changing rooms either. Issues of services, maternity and a lot of other issues went either unaddressed or inadequately discussed.

Also, the film industry’s attitude gives the notion of a very patriarchal space. Women are seen just as incidental to the space and men participate more actively than women. All these and more issues have opened up after we formed WCC. We insist that if a director has two or three assistants, than one or two of them should be women. In the policy making body there has to be 50% women. WCC is not a redressive forum, but we are asking these questions so that women go to their organisations and talk about such issues.

ICF & PD: Can you brief us about some of the specific issues that the Malayalam film industry is facing?
BP: Malayalam film industry has nothing exceptional in it. It’s part of a larger film industry. We exist because our society gives us that space. But if we look at a larger level, we can see that there are certain things that cannot be asked or questioned like the basic facilities on a set. I myself have worked in the industry as an editor for many years and I know that there are a lot of issues in the industry. For instance, it is not a 9am -5pm job and therefore one almost always needs to work overtime. However, working till late at night can lead to many security issues for women. Any taxi driver may take you home late at night, but is that good enough for you as a woman? What if something goes wrong? Whom would you go to if something does happen? Here we see a lack of mechanism, because there isn’t one. Pejorative messages, emails, gestures, casting couch, inappropriate behavior on the set; these are just few instances of sexual harassment that a woman is subjected to. So, we need to form a redressal cell to solve and discuss these issues.

ICF & PD: How do you think the formation of WCC has raised gender issues in movies, since most of the films patronise women through a patriarchal view?
BP: Certainly, for the past few years, the issue on gender has been discussed widely. Unlike the early 80’s or 90’s, people are more exposed to the question of gender and especially the younger generation. As a cinema collective, we have opened up the gates for such discussion and certainly it’s bringing a lot of change in the industry. It’s good to see people respond to such a crucial topic.

First published on Indian Cultural Forum

The post “The film industry’s attitude gives the notion of a very patriarchal space”: Bina Paul appeared first on SabrangIndia.