I had some renovation done in my room. I’m not boasting; it’s relevant. I start with this because of an awkward moment I had with one of the masons. While I was asking this dude to touch up some bits of the wall where there were some blips in the painting, he was, quite condescendingly, explaining to me how the walls of the room were at fault. To be honest, I already knew that fact. Ours is a hundred-year-old house. The walls aren’t what they used to be – which in itself wasn’t great.
It wasn’t the excuse that got me, nor, really, the condescension. It was an incredible metaphor he used that made me turn away in a desperate attempt at controlling my fury. He explained that for a boy to have value the girl he marries must be less educated. Otherwise she will tell her husband that she is as valuable as him or, god forbid, more so and not give a toss about him.
Now, what I should have done is told him that my partner currently holds more degrees than I do and, this is something I will always attest to, even after I complete my Ph.D. she will still be the more capable person in the relationship. I should also have said that it is not necessary for a woman to be valued less for a relationship to work. It is a matter of respect, not of value. I am not translating nor decorating my language here. The word ‘value’ was his.
I did none of this. He was standing above me holding a potential weapon and still in charge of how my room was going to look. It was a cowardly and materialistic choice. A choice millions of men have the privilege of making around the world.
Although I was furious, I was also fascinated. This is someone who is not outraged by social media phenomena. This was this person’s way of life. His ideology, his worldview, was that women must be valued less than men for the sake of a stable marriage. This incredible metaphor when deconstructed made the woman the less than perfect wall while the paint and painting process was the man. Therefore, in his metaphor, the walls – which to be honest are doing most of the heavy lifting, literally, in any building – are directly responsible for how good the marriage will be. The man becomes exempt from responsibility.
I believe he was trying to console me thinking I would enjoy the power being a man had endowed upon me and therefore be satisfied with his shoddy work. He wanted to say that the walls had too much character and were therefore the better educated woman who was disrupting the man’s attempts at beautifying her because she doesn’t ‘value’ him. Whatever his meaning, the misogyny was palpable.
My mason friend was himself a Dalit Muslim from Jharkhand which means that he must often find himself face to face with discrimination. He is given water or tea in separate vessels kept for that very purpose. He is not allowed to us the bathrooms he himself is building or renovating. He is barely paid minimum wage and has little dignity in the way his clients treat him. So, surely he understands that power imbalance is hugely problematic. Then, why does he choose to continue with his misogyny?
It is not his fault. Indeed, it is not even his community’s fault and, before you start, not even his religion’s. An individual, a community and a religion are simply the building blocks of a nation. The reason inequality in all aspects of daily life continues to exist is because we hide under the comfort blanket of “It’s not my fault.” And, no, for most of us, it is not directly our fault. Most of us are not wilfully, maliciously discriminating against others. However, we are taking advantage of an established power structure.
My mason friend knows he is not high on the overall social ladder. But he knows he has power over women. As a man, he feels he is automatically endowed with that power just as upper caste Hindus feel they are automatically endowed with the power to talk down to members of the lower castes no matter what their job (if not to their face, definitely behind their backs). None of this happens wilfully. It is ingrained. Asking the following questions will help you analyse this for yourself.
Next time you see a young child at a tea shop notice if you use the very informal “tui” or “tu” rather than the more respectful “tumi” or “tum” – or the equivalent in your vernacular. How do the people around you address them? Whenever someone says a professional with a non-Brahmin name is bad at their job, ask them why. If you find yourself thinking this way, ask yourself the same question. Do you feel that it is the duty of the bride’s father to provide the furniture for your marital bedroom? Do those around you feel that way? Do people still talk about “Ladka ko kitna chahiye” around you? When you see a group causing disruptions at night or drinking on the streets, how many girls do you see there? If you see a girl, what do you think about them? Do you immediately brand them as sluts? When you hear of eve-teasing, harassment and abuse, do you find yourself thinking “The girl shouldn’t have been there” or “She should be more careful” and not “What the f@$k is the matter with these boys?”
Once you start asking yourselves these questions you’ll find that the answers to many of them is a “Yes” and you’ll start to notice other situations where you and those around you act in ways you thought was normal but is essentially discriminatory. This will slowly start to scratch at and peel away the multiple coats of paint that hides your privilege from your own eyes. It will be a painful process. It will make you angry. These are normal reactions. It’s good to be angry. You’ll find yourself up against stiff opposition. But don’t give up. Trust the process. Pass on your knowledge to the next generation. Tangible social change takes time. A perfectly equitable society is without a doubt utopian thinking. However, it is attempts at perfection that provide the best results.
Comments