Curbing the gender bias ?

Recently the Government of India decided to ban a documentary by BBC on the horrific Nirbhaya rape case which happened in Delhi in December of 2012. Incidentally, this rape incident had led to a nationwide protest which contributed towards landmark changes in Indian laws related to sexual abuse and violence on women.

The rational for the ban was that the documentary in question put India in a bad light and the statements given by the convicts and their lawyers in the documentary were demeaning to the sentiments of the society and the victim.

Government's viewpoint is questionable on two counts apart from raising far more pertinent questions - Do knee jerk reactions of the government can in any way mitigate the issue of gender bias in the society ? Would global audience start seeing India as a gender neutral society just by government's condemnation of such violence or ban of a hyped coverage ?

First lets briefly talk about problem in government's line of action. Government of India armed with its remarkable idea of moral policing conveniently forgot that the very same convicts have a right to publicly assert their perspective as per the constitution of India; irrespective how irresponsible or incorrect those arguments be. In their defense convicts and their lawyers have often argued in court with similar lines of thought, which were widely broadcasted in the media during the trial, and readily rejected by the civil society - and rightly so (even though civil society does not really have any right to legally adjudicate).  So the question arises why Government or certain section of  civil society is scandalized by already known defense arguments of rape convicts and their lawyers; which never really got any traction or takers. Rather doesn't it largely reflect guilty consciousness at the end of Government ? For the fact that it has done little to curb the violence against women in a country where an incident of rape gets reported every 20 minute.

And even if for a moment we consider that government should have a role in taming the ogling mindset of large number of Indian nationals, the question is how does it really plans to do so ? Would it be by banning documentaries which highlight the issues of lack of education, economic disparity, class and sectarian divide, gender discrimination etc. contributing towards creation of rogue elements and misconstrued perceptions in the Indian society, or by taking actions like speedy trials against rape accused, promoting a more gender neutral and equal opportunity work environment, raising awareness against violence against women, imparting sex education in schools, and creating a space for women's voice in public forum and in policy initiatives ?

Prima facie it looks like Government is shooting the messenger and trying to gag the symptom instead of addressing the root cause of the problem and taking corrective actions. Knowing the fact that out of 795 Member of Parliament (read law makers), 250 have rape cases registered against them and in most cases the case trials are pending for years.

The glaring misconception of government is also reflected in its understanding that a certain recorded documentary or a news story related to rape would be a counter-narrative country's image.

On the contrary the cultural exchange and interactions between nationalities, tourist and personal visits, behavior of a visiting Indian national in a foreign country, and perceptions drawn from experiences of those exchanges are often the biggest contributors in creating an impression. And on all those aspects one must assess how a large number of Indian men fare while dealing with females of foreign nationalities.

The regular instance of misdemeanor with a visiting female in India is no secret. It has impacted India's positioning so much so that government had to launch a massive campaign of atithi devo bhavah (A visitor is like a god) to create awareness for respecting the tourists.

If I talk about behavior of Indian men in foreign countries based on my own experiences, I would have no hesitation in saying that the desired behavioral norms with a female are often broken; either knowingly or due to their complacency. Many a time this also happens in company of an Indian female - who does not mind chuckling on such delinquencies. And it is remarkable that in most instances the person in question believes that the victimized female would not imply anything negative about his behavior due to cultural divide or the language barrier. Conveniently forgetting that body language, gestures, and facial expressions do contribute towards behavioral assesment and a gruesome sexist actions are not easy to ignore.

It is rather intriguing that in most cases academic credentials, profession, or demography of Indian men do not really differentiate the nasty conclusions (which are often far and beyond the phrase "blonde ...") drawn for women of other nationalities. I often find that there is an inherent consistency in some of these sexist and raunchy remarks - whether from Indian professionals in a foreign corporation, or from Indian students in the cafeteria of a well known varsity, or from a group of young Indians enjoying a happy hour at a local bar. Surprisingly in many such instances Indian women or girls accompanying these men are often seen to be conveniently forgiving about such behavior by their male colleagues/friends.

The need for behavioral awareness among Indian men while dealing with opposite sex of the other nationalities is imperative. As we continue to raise awareness in domestic front one must also talk about gender bias on the basis of color of the skin and the nationality. If we do not proactively discuss and readily address it, it would continue to haunt the country's image in globalized world. And so far it continues to darken the ghastly perception of Indian men and the society in general in front of international audience - which incidentally the Government of India wants to improve by banning documentaries.

But politics lost in Bihar

The polity of Bihar has been known for its astute political acumen and the last decade or so has been signified by its perseverance for a more progressive nature of politics. Since 2005 the overarching vision for socioeconomic progress has transcribed in the voting pattern despite fringe aspects of caste, sect, dhanbal and bahubal remaining in the foray.

The underlying priorities for assembly elections of November 2005 & 2010 were defined by a broader societal consensus for change. Probably after a long time hope and aspirations of constituents were underlining the political merit. A radical shift for a State mired in caste politics and surrounded by the hoopla of lawlessness. But more importantly the politics was organically becoming progressive and more liberal in nature. Swasthya, Shiksha, Susashan, and Sadak were fast replacing  Bhurabaal, Bahubal, and Bandook as buzz words.   

Come 2014 and the state witnessed another watershed; this time for BJP or rather Narendra Modi after its coalition with Janata Dal (United) broke. We may dispute it but yet again the electoral prospects in Bihar were defined by the vision of progressiveness and hope for the nation.

However the Jeetan Ram Manjhi saga seems to have pushed all of the evolving political ideas into the bin and caste-goonism seems to be making a grand reentry in the political hubris. The grandeur claims of safeguarding dalit interests may have complex ramifications but it is likely to rekindle the notion of intense social maneuvering in the political circles - which in essence would bring seasoned fixers back into the mix. A new lease of life for many redundant hangers across the party line. And one of the biggest damage of this changing political dynamics would be minimal role and opportunity for young political aspirants and for those who aspired to pursue a far more progressive and new age politics. 

This is unfortunate on 2 counts. First it may have further dented the prospect of electoral meritocracy in Bihar as witnessed in Delhi elections; where now ticket distribution and campaign would be heavily based on sectarian and caste arithmetic and would mostly benefit those who are totally engrossed in it.  Secondly the new age progressive political acumen generated in the past decade via a rather positive political churning would either be lost or contaminated. And both would be a serious loss to Bihar which in the long run would witness a humongous political vacuum with the likely absence of authentic leadership. 

Keeping in view that it takes atleast a decade for generational shift in politics and for new entrants to get acclimatized to the political game, Bihar would be deprived of some potential natural leaders in immediate future and instead would have at its helm the benefactors of sycophancy and dynasty politics.

If we pick 5 of the biggest leaders in today’s politics of Bihar, we would identify almost everyone’s root to emergency movement of mid seventies. It is remarkable that a politically astute state like Bihar has not produced a single big leader outside the gambit of Jay Prakash Narayan’s Sampurn Kranti movement in the past 40 years. Compare that with evolution of political leadership in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Assam, UP, Karnataka and the results would be glaring. 

This only underlines the issue of brick mongering, backstabbing, and mistrust in Bihar politics and beyond a doubt Jeetan Ram Manjhi’s actions are going to subvert the notion of political trust to a new low. His actions may have induced a greater level of insecurity among the political leaders and would only jeopardize any prospect of leadership transition across the party line.  

Patronage of Pilot

This happened around 9 years back. I was in college then and in the recently held general elections Sachin Pilot had won his first election from Dausa, Rajasthan at the age of 26 to become youngest parliamentarian. All excited, I felt he is young, grounded, and would probably understand a youngster's zeal to be in politics and hence would give me some opportunity or direct me to work with the party as an intern or something similar (there were many youngsters of my age who would routinely get such opportunities because someone in their family knew some prominent leader). I called up his office, took appointment, and went to meet him at his residence one early winter morning.

There were many other people from his constituency waiting to meet him to discuss their woes. Close to 9 am, all visitors were lined up side by side in 3 rows (face forward) and were told MP Sahab would appear in some time. We were told to keep our talk very concise (within a minute) as MP sahab has to attend important meetings and cannot spend much time with us.

Soon Sachin appeared all dressed up and chic in white designer kurta. Suddenly I saw a group of elderly men falling on his feet to seek his blessings. They were lying flat on the ground and their face were on Sachin's feet. He asked them to get up and addressed them but I was struck by his feudalistic demeanor. Soon he came over to me, spent less than 10 seconds looking at my face and moved on to talk to the next guy beside me. I could barely complete my sentence before I realized that he is talking to someone else. I felt very humiliated but found solace in the fact that everyone had somewhat similar fate; there was nothing personal about it. After visitors were told to disband I followed up with his secretary; he gave me his card saying "email me whatever you have to convey and we would revert to you." Needless to say that reply never came.

Though I understand Sachin is bright and he may have his own social and political compulsions but his regal conduct and despotic behaviour of his staff towards commoners was very demeaning and discouraging. On a side note, I was personally very happy when he lost the recent Lok Sabha elections of 2014. 

Sachin no doubt is much better than the rest but I do really think that in public life the more educated you are, the more callous and ignorant for commoners you end up becoming. Albeit some exceptions. It is not about a party or an ideology.

Also, it is not about a particular individual and the bigger point here is that many political leaders don't really value common people and it clearly reflects in their body language and demeanor. Anyone who may have wandered in political circles may better know that for many politicians priority lies in finer aspects of life than in calmly listening to a commoner keen to talk to them.

Ironically some years later I was working on a technological project for MIT's OLPC initiative and was directed by my office to work with Sachin Pilot's office who was then a Minister of State for Information Technology. Though I never met Sachin and coordinated with his Officer on Special Duty (OSD), his OSD ensured that I was always welcome in "honorable minister's" office and had a complete uninhibited access, even if it meant dropping by to have a leisurely cup of tea with his OSD. And every single time I visited Electronics Niketan (IT Ministry) it reminded me of that cold winter morning at Sachin's house and that disparate treatment meted to commoners. 

Some experiences get stuck in one's thought process and leave a lasting impression. As much as I hate right wing imperialistic politics, I also sincerely hope that the political journey and patronage of Badals, Thackerays,  Pilots, Gandhis, Abdullahs, and Yadavs of the world comes to end very soon.

*********************************************************************************

A point was raised by one of the readers that does a MP really have to prioritize meeting with people especially when his/her focus could be to meet industrialists, Ministers etc.

This may answer that question: "MPs must try to meet their constituency commitments by regular meetings with constituents in their electorates. If these interests are not attended to, no amount of party commitment can guarantee a return to parliament at the next election."

"Whatever the system of election is, access to one’s MP is a form of contact that is significant, important and greatly valued by voters. Without that contact, the basis for a democratic legislature could come under serious question. "

Link: http://www.parliamentarystrengthening.org/commonwealthmodule/pdf/Commonwealth%20Unit%208.pdf

Entrepreneurship Promotion

 1. Establish a Entrepreneurship Promotion Fund to invest seed capital in student projects/ideas. Like Carnegie Mellon's Open Field Entrepreneurship Fund

2. Invest in streamlining information about Entrepreneurship promoting institutions/body and Enterprise development competitions across the globe and make it readily available to budding entrepreneurs via an online platform. Regularly invite some of these institutions on campus for knowledge and ideas sharing with students

3. Forge partnership with atleast 2 or 3 leading organizations which promote social entrepreneurship and design thinking. Many of these organization have college chapters and they work with budding entrepreneurs via these chapters e.g. Ashoka. Action for India, Skoll Foundation, India Innovation Fund, Stanford Design Lab etc.

4. Create an infrastructure and incorporate resources that provides information and takes care of all logistical needs for setting up an enterprise. Something like a one stop solution to facilitates the processes right from enterprise registration to website development for entrepreneurs.

5. Host at least a series of competitions which are focussed towards entrepreneurial thinking. e.g Make a pitch, Intramural Business ideas in 24 hours, Business decathlons. Ensure there is a good prize money for at least one of the competitions.
 

Vilifying Socialism and misconstrued idea of Left

Among several other achievements of French Revolution which had profound impact on Modern history had been the coining of the term "ideology". In 1796, while participating in philosophical and political debates French Philosopher Destutt de Tracy combined the words "idea" and "logy" with a sense of neutrality to reflect political inclinations towards a given set of political thoughts.

Though representation of thoughts from a political standpoint never necessarily needed a terminology in the ancient world however the coining of the term ideology had a remarkable impact on political notions of the modern history. It helped them define better and set forward a parameter for polity and helped   avoid the politics of convenience or deviations from their political beliefs. It increasingly became a term for the analysis of different political opinions and perspectives on social strata and led to bifurcation of political ideas into the Left and the Right.

The modern world has seen a wide range of denominations of the Left and the Right however in general Left has often represented the likes of Progressives, Communists, Social-Liberals, Secularists, Anti-imperialists, Anti-Capitalist, and Socialists. Similarly the Right has represented the ideas of people identifying themselves as Conservatives, Neo-liberals, Monarchists, Theocrats, Nationalists, Capitalists, and Imperialists.

To be continued ...