If you think about how economists (especially Amartya Sen) understand malnutrition – it’s about distribution. Distribution is about power. Intra-household distribution of food is a very crucial issue for feminist field work. Women have all the answers – you just need to universalize the experience. I can think of one instance where one village woman stood up and listed every activity she did in a day – compared to all that her husband did. She then compared their food intake. Other women had similar stories. Feminism is about understanding superstructures and how they affect our personal and political choices (or the lack of them).

You can live in a city/ village all you like – and never be aware of the reality. I have no idea what village you grew up in, but please understand that (village != agriculture). Villages have agrarian economies. Agriculture drives livelihood, life choices and a lot more – but even if you understand agriculture completely – you may not understand an iota of village life.

I have an issue with icons. I appreciate and admire individuals. But I cannot deal with iconizing them. That was the entire point of the post. That while one action of hers can be admired by me at a personal level – the other doesn’t fit in. What does one praise? The action or the individual?

Some people can live with infidelity, some can’t. I am not here to moralize about it. But the issue is – even within a relationship – can both people aspire to the same treatment of infidelity? If a person can’t live with it – can they afford to walk out?

Feminism is more about power than anything else. Who controls. Who owns. Why do they control it. Who assigned ownership. Is it a rigid equation? The answer to Patriarchy is not Matriarchy. (I prefer anarchy as an answer/ solution). As for organising oneself – please attend some selfhelp groups conducted by Mahila Samakhya. What Mahila Samakhya does is to enable women to address immediate needs in a separate space, so women can address strategic needs in a collaborative space.

Patriarchy is institutional. You need to modify the institutions – not walk away from them.

Also – I am a little tired of discussing this issue without you making an effort to articulate what you want to say, or do some research about it. Frankly – it’s to no end.

Again, all I wanted to say was what Neha said too:

“Fidelity or poking into personal relationships is not the domain of feminism.”

And WA : Exactly. She does not want favoritism. But isnt feminism just all about that now? It actually started off as wanting “normal” or “equal” treatment that has now turned into “special” treatment. And now, almost everything tends to be labelled as feminism in some way or the other. Neofeminism is what one needs to look up.

I also added that I was being very picky too by expecting it to be ideal :)

Oh I was talking only about how the women I know dealt with relationship issues, not about abuse. Cha, I really need to be more articulate – Now I see why Neha wrote that! I was very surprised when she suddenly started off with all that malnutrition statistics bit. Sorry for all my incoherency.

You see I was just addressing Neha’s statement that she found Kannagi’s not asking for justice within her relationship difficult to digest as a feminist. But even then my perception was that her chastity being praised was possibly a later day addition by some MCP’s. But then Vidya clarified as that not being true. So if I have issues with infidelity being made an issue, I definitely have issues with chastity being praised, illaya? I have no issues with one opposing Kannaki being deified at this age for chastity. Expecting that Kannagi should have fought for justice within her realtionship
is a personal opinion, not to be confused with feminism. If it is, it becomes neofeminism.

I did agree with everything else that Neha and some other people said. WA and Neha, sincere apologies for all the confusion. All the while I was talking only about infidelity and feminism. I probably shouldnt write anymore when I cant read everything :)).

“Give it a different name if you like, but it needs to be addressed and it most certainly does exist.”

Very true, to the people whom you help, it doesnt really matter what you label it, all that it matters is that they get that.

And gosh, lets call it a day! Enough sophism, really :D.

And as to equal status of women in your village, you are in lala land by the sounds of it. Believe me, abuse in all forms most certainly does exist not just in your village or the city your were brought up in but also in the west were we live. You are right, we don’t need ‘feminism’ to address the issues of abuse and inequality. Give it a different name if you like, but it needs to be addressed and it most certainly does exist.

“Fidelity or poking into personal relationships is not the domain of feminism.”

Thanks – that was all that I was trying to say before I got misled with unnecessary feminism angst.

About the statistics bit, I did concur that prejudices exist , illa ya?

And to address domestic abuse and malnutrition, we need feminism in wat way? To ask for special rights/reservations and say “I am a female, so dont hurt me/please feed me”? Feminism and reservations/special consideration cannot be mutually exclusive. Whatever happened to plain old humanitarianism (eventhough that also is too ideal to exist in the structure of things)?

I do know that organizations like Mahila Samkhya help. I just dont think they need a largely feministic approach. It very easily spills into neo-feminism soon and more sexual segregation and asexual conditioning among the women. We have enough of that stemming from our societal framework everyday.

Here I am being picky about the existing non-profit organizations when I hate idealistic perspectives anyway :P

Anyway whatever works for you, sweetheart ;). I am truly sorry that I flipped out on the feminism-fidelity tying up. It is just a rehash of my immaturity from the AIDS post.

Btw, I just read your, some others’ and my own responses – some portions of my earlier responses are irrevelant, incoherent or redundant, from that perspective :D

(Neha now gets super annoyed and reaches for the baseball bat – illa athuyum meeri bayankara kovamaa ;)? )

Vidya, thanks :)

Raja and Kooja, Point – Agreed :) The main reason why I wouldnt agree with “feminism” is because it borders on favoritism for a specific group of people. And feminism has lost its original intentions – it is now confused with everything and used very loosely. I also think the status quo will be maintained because if with the resources we have today, we still have prejudices, we always will. Hence from a realistic-cum-pessimistic point of view, feminism is useless.

(A quote from Joseph Campbell on sexual segregation in South Asia:)

Consequence of the partition of the sexes: The chance of personal adventure, determined by the personality of a representative of the opposite world and energized by an unpredicted interplay of the two fundamental human attitudes, is simply not permitted to exist. The results are numerous, among them being a sort of proto-homosexuality, a lack of life-inventiveness, and a satisfaction with clichés.
–Joseph Campbell, Baksheesh and Brahman: Indian journal, 1954-1955 (New York: HarperCollins, 1995).

On why the status quo will always be maintained within this population – the stated consequences of the said vice speak for themselves. Its a catch-22, fellas.

Fidelity or poking into personal relationships is not the domain of feminism. However, personal choices are reflective of political contexts. I worked for two years with victims of domestic violence, and runaway girls. If anything, I learnt that it’s a very fragile system of pretentions. Walking out is not a choice for most people. I suggest you go back to your village and ask – without your “city” mask on.

When I worked at the two centres that I mentioned – I had to support women and girls who were attempting to work out real-life solutions. Feminism is both an academic and realistic framework for me. I don’t let 5% of a sample distort my opinion of it. What is the other 95% doing? The first rule of assisting someone in process of change is to NOT judge. I don’t judge why a woman didn’t walk out as soon as she was abused. Not to say that she should walk out or shouldn’t walk out. But suppose she does want to walk out – help her assess the options – point her in the directions where some help could be sought. As far as the issue of reservations for women in concerned – I think it’s a crap idea. It’s to distract us from real issues.

Please take a closer look at malnutrition statistics. Tell me if more girls are not starving. Take a closer look at dropout statistics for girls in schools. A child who isn’t given an opportunity she can technically afford till the age of 18 hasn’t had a fair start in the first place. But reservations are not and never will be the answer. Feminism is about recognizing these systemic inequities. To atleast acknowledge them. To recognize them. We may have the right to vote – but workplaces still don’t give women equal pay.

Feminism may not be relevant to your life in obvious ways. But right from securing a woman’s choice to abort, to equal pay, right to property, right to livelihood, right to health – these are real issues that most women in India and the world over still face. It’s wonderful if you don’t need it – but in that sense you in less of a position to determine whether or not others need it.

For understanding more about how practical feminist frameworks have helped – I suggest you also look an nonformal education practices as adopted by organisations like Mahila Samakhya.

I just dont like the idea that one has to come up with “secularism” and “feminism” even now, at this age, to build say a “better framework”, for lack of a better term.

My original and remaining contention is that feminism shouldnt poke its nose into stuff like infidelity in relationships. If a woman cannot walk out of a relationship because of reasons like dependence and society, that is when feminism was necessary – 50 years ago. Today, if we still find women who believe that they have to stay in a relationship that is abusive because of a) society or b) financial dependence (i cant think of anything else) it is just their delusion. Even women in my village dont do that anymore. In fact I cannot even think of one woman in my village who would put up with crap when they are not happy with something.

And imo, if they still choose to believe that they have no option, at this age and time, they are just impossible to be helped, they can never come out of it ever. They possibly prefer not to part some cushion somewhere and hence are allowing themselves to be so abused.

My angst against feminism is not because of lack of exposure to problems that women face, its because of the too many feminists I know who never solve those problems but grumble about non-issues. I was once forced to write a cover story on some stupid perceived-to-be “anti-feminist” remark (800 words and all). And at the same time, a job was assigned to a man when a more capable woman was available, just based on gender. And that never even made it to the “water fountain”.

And I dont like the “we are women, we need reservations, we are weak” or the “we are women, we are strong, we dont need men” –this bit of feminist talk is ewww. And it is prudish if feminism must poke its nose into issues like fidelity or if they demand different restrooms for women and men, or if they want no women to participate in beauty contests, etc. (that is highly representative of desi feministic media).

The prejudices (religious, gender) exist, I dont disagree. But they are not really not being addressed through just talking “feminism” or “secularism”. People should start acting on it,or atleast know that they they do have the “option” to. And I really hope they are not waiting for a feminist to come tell them that.

And Silappathikaram’s chauvinism then is today’s opposition to gay marriages and all those people from liberal schools who ask stupid questions like “why do gay people have to get married?”.

I know I am ignorant of the epic – I just wanted to argue on this one, and I did – Thanks ma :) !