Tag

Sexism

Browsing

TRIGGER WARNING- A certain video is discussed in this article which might be disturbing for some.

 

On 30th April, a video showing just another instance of judgemental remarks based on sexism and misogyny went viral. The video was shared by Shivani Gupta, on her Instagram, showing an elderly lady saying that she (Gupta) will get raped if she continues wearing short skirts. When Shivani’s two friends arrived at the scene to their friend’s rescue, the lady went on to say that these two also might get raped just for being rebellious.

These are the parts that the woke and conscious side of the internet shared mostly. However, towards the end, we also see the young women yelling at this lady, asking her ‘Have you been raped?’.

A few hours later, Instagram took this video down and this is what went down amongst people.

One school of thought feels that sharing this video online was the right move, and this would embarrass the ‘bullying’ woman, and set an example for people. Yes, misogyny is ingrained in Indian society but now it’s high time we get done with it.

On the other hand, there are also people who feel this was an extreme move and they are troubled with the latter parts of the video. They say ‘Bullying the bully isn’t the right thing to do’.

Yes, I do condemn that messaging mean texts to that elderly lady and commenting remarks like “You yourself should get raped.” However, staying silent and having the normalised attitude isn’t going to help anyone.

This instance isn’t in solitude. It can be attached to tons of other incidents where women in India have been subjected to mean public remarks. Yes, the video might be nothing new as such casual sexism is common. Still, does that mean we should just see this incident as nothing and turn a blind eye towards it?

Today, I, being in the capital city, being a student at the University of Delhi, can have opinions on anything and everything in our country. I can even talk on problems that rural women face but I can hardly do much, from my privileged safe space in this city. However, I can still be vocal about the indecent behaviour that the inhabitants of my city are facing. Sometimes, being calm just does not help.

If people are sharing this video, they aren’t just sharing it for the sake of it. They are sharing it to show that this is a part of the bigger picture and we all need to collectively condemn this negative picture. It irks me when I see friends and peers pass comments like “The girl is just an attention seeker” and “yeh toh hota rehta hai” (Such things keep on happening) when such cases are brought in the mainstream. Unfortunately, I cannot even call them out right now as that will be categorised as unethical journalism.

There have been viewers of the video, who are somewhere on the middle ground, too. “I agree, the aggression and the boldness are required so that no one can come to a woman and tell her that she should get raped. At the same time, we need to think twice before we reveal someone’s identity, body shame them and potentially ruin their life,” says Shania Mohapatra, a student from Cluster Innovation Centre (CIC).

While yes, hatred should not be propagated, but people should also understand that we can’t stay silent with our thoughts bottled up like we’re living in an Orwellian society. After some stubbornness, even I agree that the lady’s face could have been blurred before uploading the video. In the video itself, one can hear the girls saying that the ‘problematic aunty’ deserves to be raped in those kapde (clothes) itself, which again is equally rude and problematic.

One day later, mainstream publications shared the video obviously as it’s news now. And it does sicken me when people are posting comments like “Yes, these girls deserve to be taught a lesson. If we don’t check, they’ll dress in bras in public.” At the same time, I finally gave up my stubbornness and had a gloomy look as I read comments from the other side, comments like “Someone should attack the aunty just for that double chin and eye bags.”

“The one thing that is bothering me about the video and the subsequent criticism it received is that the blame of cyberbullying of the “aunty” is being put on the girl who shared the video. Saying that the girl is responsible for the mental harassment of the lady, sounds like victim-blaming,” Niharika Dabral, another CIC student took a different stand. “Besides, in this case, the girls and the aunty had the same power equation,” she adds, “…as they both spoke English and looked like they belonged to the same class, so it’s not as though some powerful person is going after a smaller one.”

Whatever be your viewpoint, this instance can’t be ignored just because it’s normal, as a few are doing. Following the same mentality, we shouldn’t even talk about the innumerable individual cases of creeps staring at women in the metro like it’s their birthright. Why? Because this keeps on happening, right? This isn’t a call for being an extreme vigilante but this is just a call for being vocal.

Whether you feel Instagram made the right decision by removing that video or whether you feel sharing this video with some sense of rebellion was needed, you need to be vocal about it. Yes, almost every social discussion ends up having multiple views but we need to be vocal in discussing these views to come to a solution – if there’s a solution.

 

Image Credits: sunkissedshitzu

 

Shaurya Singh Thapa

[email protected]

SRES’19 brought to light the role of institutions in ignoring and normalising sexist conditioning. Read on to find out how.

On 18th and 19th January 2019, the Economics Society of Shri Ram College of Commerce (SRCC) organised the 2019-edition of the Shri Ram Economics Summit (SRES). SRES’19 was in the news for hosting the former President of India, Dr. Pranab Mukherjee, but his closing address had to be substituted with a panel of SRCC professors, due to the former’s absence owing to unavoidable circumstances.

The panel’s objective was to have a dialogue on the role of SRCC in tackling gender disparity and inequality issues.Including the staff heads of the Internal Complaints’ Committee (ICC), Ms. Reena Chadha, and the Women’s Development Cell (WDC), Dr. Monika Bansal, held deliberations that spiraled into a tokenistic appreciative rant, instead of an analytical discussion among academicians with a platform to influence. For instance, Ms. Chadha stated that the era of #MeToo had a significant impact on the way gender inequality gaps were to be bridged, but she also explicitly suggested in the same breath that SRCC had received no complaints in the wave of #MeToo. Another female professor was asked to share her experiences of working ‘freely and safely till 9 p.m.’ at SRCC, as compared to how the society treated her outside the campus for being an independent woman who reached home late.

The faculty head of ICC did encourage the students to report sexual harassment claims, but the majority of the discussion was focussed on SRCC’s pride in not being amid controversies pertaining to the movement, and the implied absence of gender disparity and discrimination in the campus. With an estimated strength of 2800 students, statistics imply that students from all over the gender spectrum must be enrolled at the college, claiming to present an absolute lack of problematic sexism.

Suhani Singhal, the first female President of the Finance and Investment Cell (FIC) at SRCC shared, “FIC is one of the very few societies where all posts were allocated on the basis of commitment and capabilities, and where the cabinet ended up having a female majority. Our seniors at FIC were fair, and a factor like gender was not given consideration. But a few people in the college had a hard time coming to terms with the fact that a female is leading a Cell oriented towards finance.” Nikita Bhatia, a student of SRCC,stated, “Most societies in SRCC have had male presidents for years. Enactus, the Dramatics Society, Debating Society, Economics Society, and Placement Cell have normally had male presidents, and this trend still continues. With the exception of English Literary Society or Fine Arts Society, which aren’t givenmuch priority in a Commerce college anyway, all other major roles are held by men. This isn’t meant to undermine their credibility or merit, but it only begs us to wonder why, in a college with almost the same number of male and female students, are these trends of disproportionality so evident. The idea here is that dogmatic gender roles are so deeply entrenched in our society that often we fail to pinpoint gender disparity because it has been normalised. I believethat asking questions as to why these trends are prevalent becomes important in discussions about gender disparity, especially at an event as televised and marketed as SRES’19.” To be proud of stating that the ICC did not receive complaints in the #MeToo wave about similar problematic actions is along the lines of survivor voice oppression; for self-blame, humiliation, and a fear of retaliation manifest in the survivor’s psyche after sexual abuse in many cases, and to present a seemingly perfect picture of their abuser’s house may instil more apprehension to speak up. According to Psychology Today, “Many (sexually assaulted college women) are afraid to report the rape to their college administration because of a long history of cases being mishandled.”
Thus, praises of how well the college has maintained its clean record status should be replaced with an acceptance of the truth of misogynistic cultural conditioning, so that the administration appears more approachable to them wronged students. Arundhati Roy summed up the methodical suppression- by-suggestion when she said, “There’s really no such thing as the ‘voiceless’. There are only the deliberately silenced
or the preferably unheard.”

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat

Anushree Joshi

[email protected]

(With inputs from Nikita Bhatia)

Movements that start on social media have a way of fizzing out into oblivion on their own, so it is important to analyse their impact, by following up on regular intervals. What happened to some of the men named in the movement? Read on to know.

Women from all over the world grow up experiencing one or the other form of sexism, and even harassment by the time they leave their childhood years behind. Men are either on the causal end of this, or in a vicious cycle experience it in the form of toxic masculinity themselves. The individuals who do not identify with the conventional genders are, in fact, more prone to assault and sexual humiliation in their lives. The evidence of such harassment seldom exists because there are no security cameras recording inappropriate groping in a crowded place, or seemingly casual grazing of the thighs by well-meaning relatives behind closed doors.

The #MeToo movement has been criticized as a witch-hunt that aims to further the character assassinations of celebrities, especially famous men, without substantial evidence to support the allegations. But allegations have been made, nonetheless, because a small fraction of the society decided to stand by imperfect feminism, instead of perfect misogyny and patriarchy in a fortunate and well-deserved change of events.

It is not only significant to stay informed on the subject of predatory behaviour perpetrated by the widely admired personalities, but it also becomes integral for the moral fabric of the society to hold the accused accountable to their victims, and for their actions. As the public not directly involved in the occurrences, one part to play is in following through once an accusation has been made. Here is a list of the some Indian celebrities who were ousted for their sexually predatory behaviour, along with the details of what happened to them, and to justice, in the aftermath of the allegations against them:

  1. Shamir Reuben (Writer/Poet)

According to a report published in The Quint on February 11, 2018, Kommune- a storytelling platform, for which the content and social media were headed by Reuben- suspended his association. Accused of predatory behaviour with minors since his ask.fm days, Reuben issued an apology through a post on Facebook.

Harnidh Kaur, a poet claiming to be a feminist, and a writer from Mumbai, had extended support to the women thinking of pursuing legal action against Reuben. Sources reveal no further legal action has been taken against Reuben, despite the accounts of over ten women accusing him of lewd and obscene behaviour.

  1. Chintan Ruparel (Writer)

The co-founder of the popular storytelling platform, Terribly Tiny Tales, and a former advertising brain, was accused by Gauri Awasthi of inappropriate conduct in a professional setting. His former girlfriend, Shrutee Choudhary, then came out to share her own experience of abuse and toxicity with Ruparel. Accounts in double digits started a flurry over social media platforms as his former wife, and numerous women who attended his workshops, spoke up against him.

Terribly Tiny Tales removed him from his position as the Chief Content Officer on 8th October, 2018. According to Anuj Gosalia, the Chief Executive Officer and founder, Ruparel’s name was dissociated from the company’s lease officially on 3rd November, 2018.

Ruparel has not spoken on any social media platform regarding the allegations and his removal from the company, but the platform set up an Internal Complaints Committee, and reached out to its community of writers to encourage the reporting of any inappropriate behaviour on behalf of the employees’ part.

  1. Alok Nath (Actor)

Originally ousted by writer-producer, Vinta Nanda, and then named a habitual predator by personalities like Sandhya Mridul, Amyra Dastur, Navneet Nishan, and some other former colleagues, Nath has termed the allegations baseless. As per a report published in the Times of India, he hit the foundation of the entire movement by stating, “In today’s world, whatever a woman says, only that will be considered.” Following up with his publicly claimed outrage, Nath demanded a public apology from Nanda, and went on to file a defamation suit against her in the realm of civil law. By November 21, Nanda had lodged an official complaint at the Oshiwara Police Station in Mumbai, regarding the 19 years’ old incident. Alok Nath also faced expulsion from the Cine and TV Artists’ Association (CINTAA), and the Indian Film and Television Directors’ Association (IFTDA) promised legal action against the actor after he failed to respond to their notice concerning his misconduct. The legal proceedings are underway against the man who gained fame as the symbol of ‘sanskaar’ (values) in the world of celluloid.

  1. Gautam Adhikari (Journalist)

Despite his denial of the allegations made against him by multiple subordinates and colleagues, the founding editor of DNA resigned from his position as senior fellow at the Centre for American Progress (CAP) located in Washington DC. According to The Wire, the officials at CAP confirmed his resignation after an internal investigation was initiated in the issues concerning his conduct.

  1. R. Sreenivas (Journalist)

After over seven accounts of sexual misconduct and molestation were shared with regard to the Hyderabad resident editor of the national daily, Times of India, he was sent on an administrative leave on 9th October, 2018. According to The Print, Mr. Sreenivas resigned by 13th October, and was to be investigated by an internal committee of The Times Group (BCCL). As of December 1, 2018, the committee is independently investigating the former editor based on the substantial evidence against his inappropriate actions.

  1. Rajat Kapoor (Actor/Director)

Accused of sexual misconduct and forceful behaviour by women journalists and a few anonymous accounts on Twitter, the actor issued an apology for his wrongful actions towards ‘other human beings’. He did not accept outright responsibility for his actions. The actor’s work, titled ‘Kadakh’, was dropped from the lineup of the 20th edition of the Mumbai Academy of Moving Image (MAMI) festival in lieu with the allegations against the actor.

There are numerous other names which have been brought to question by the power of the movement. Women like Kangana Ranaut, actress, and Aditi Mittal, comedian, were also accused of toxic actions in a relationship, and forceful physical contact, respectively. Acclaimed singer, Sonu Nigam, offered negative criticism of the accountability in the movement while speaking up in support of the accused musician, Anu Malik. Debates and differing opinions continue to make a whirlwind, but the bottom-line of the #MeToo movement is to bring perpetrators down from the pedestal, and question them as effectively as possible.

Image Courtesy: Medium

Anushree Joshi

[email protected]

An account of a day’s happenings involving Hindu College students, politics, and social media.

 

Sometimes in the light of humour and candidness, people tend to cross the line of what’s appropriate and what’s not. A string of sexist remarks had fermented a social media battle in Hindu College since yesterday. It all started with a Physics Hons student’s Facebook post. Sachin Gupta in a post on the social networking site started out with the lines ‘Just saw two chicks wearing short skirts and high boots…’.He mocked how such girls tend to wear short clothes even when the city’s thermometer is on the extreme low, a particular phrase in his post being ‘…they had to show off their thighs which weren’t thicc at all…’.

Well, this country has the freedom of speech so Sachin expressed himself casually expressing his judgemental sexist views. However, students from various departments in the college expressed their disgust and displeasure towards the Physics student’s views with the majority feeling freedom of speech does not imply to openly let out demeaning thoughts. However, this post was just the start.

This was followed by a string of ruder comments, a prominent one being by another Physics student and one of the Person with Disabilities (PwD) secretary of the Hindu College Parliament, Devashish Singh who commented ‘These species don’t feel winter- 1) Penguins 2) Polar Bear 3) Whores’. Naturally, the post and the comments sparked off an upsurge and began to be shared repeatedly amongst students. When asked about his comments, Devashish followed up with another comment stating ‘…I will keep my mentality with me cos I don’t care what they say about me.’. Other comments by some more people were equally uncultured like take ‘Photo khinch lena tha’ (You should have clicked a photo), for instance!

IMG_1949

Holding a Cabinet position in the college parliament and being involved in such tussles is a risky move as the students would start questioning the whole parliament too who didn’t bring out an official statement in response yet.

Devashish, who was yesterday boldly proclaiming his freedoms and adamant nature to express himself, became an apologetic post holder today. Both Sachin and Devashish posted long apologies on their Facebook walls, ‘clarifying their stance’ and ‘apologising sincerely’ for their comments in a subdued tone. The Canteen Secretary, Utkarsh Sharma, also took to social media saying that he acknowledges that this is the sort of behaviour that is symptomatic of male chauvinism and male privilege.  “I hope that Hinduites will have a fair judgement on the matter,” Utkarsh added.

The students are still not satisfied with this sudden mood swing. Many are of the view that Devashish just posted a formal apology because he fears losing his seat in the parliament. Rishabh Chaturvedi, an English Honours student college fumes in anger, ‘He deserves no second chances. He deserves to be removed from the Parliament.’

Bhagyashree, a first year Political Science Student, lamented on how such people are making Hindu a shameful institution. After the Facebook apologies were put up, Bhagyashree boldly mocked these statements by putting up a photo on Instagram, a photo of her leg in a fishnet stocking writing ‘Comment karo ji’’. The Women’s Development Cell of Hindu College also made their displeasure evident through a post condemning the sexist statements.

It might seem like a minor unrest but in the end, it is connected to larger issues whose origin all lies in the attitudes of people. Would such casual sexism be eradicated through such active opposition from the students or would Hindu College continue to be defamed because of such chauvinistic attitudes? That, only the students and time will tell.

 

Shaurya Thapa

[email protected]

The Hindi film industry, right from its very inception has been misogynistic and has sexualised women. Bollywood glorifies homely or ‘sanskaari’. Women deserve better portrayal and it is time Bollywood shunned these stereotypes.

Gal Gadot’s character, Diana in Wonder Woman made me feel so powerful, that my words wouldn’t be able to do justice to describe the feeling. I cried while watching ‘Wonder Woman’, with tears of joy rolling down my cheeks. No, Diana wasn’t the hero’s love interest. She was the female lead in a film directed by Patty Jenkins, a woman. She fought for herself and for others and defended her values and principles. Men around her didn’t feel intimidated. The film got over 50% female audiences in movie theatres, an achievement for the superhero world, which generally appeals to the young and male audience.

Let’s talk about the Hindi film industry where women through the ages have been shown as weak and passive. They are made to have an identity by virtue of their association with male characters. The directors show women wearing skimpy clothes in the dance numbers and use derogatory language against women. Women’s bodies are reduced to tools for control and domination. Women are given significantly shorter, less relevant roles and speak fewer words in films.  It is quite obvious that women, even in the leading roles are replaceable; their presence on the screen doesn’t leave much of an impact or doesn’t take the story forward.

Bollywood has also been successful in normalizing stalking. Men in real life get inspired and keep on pestering and harassing women who reject them. They do not understand the word ‘No’ and believe that a woman who has rejected them is actually just playing hard to get. When they are unable to deal with said rejection, they decide to teach her ‘a lesson’, something that contributes to the revenge centric mentality that is on the rise.  One might also notice how young women are always paired with much older men. Aged women are never given substantial roles to play in films. All women characters talk about in the films are about their boyfriends, husbands and how their lives revolve around them.  Bollywood has also set absurdly high, unrealistic standards for women in terms of having an ideal body which is desirable to men. How a woman should look, dress and behave is also dictated by them.

This does not mean that film or art needs to curtain or portray women unrealistically. However, the portrayal of “real women” is extremely important. We need women who are architects, engineers and doctors, women who have careers and a life outside nurturing other men and doing emotional labour for them. We need women who defy the stereotypes and do exactly the same things as men do, except for harassing others. We need women who are in charge of their own lives and do not let others define their life choices for them. The Dirty Picture, Anarkali of Aarah, Lipstick under my Burkha and Pink changed the perception that women-centric films do not perform well at the box office. They brought the spotlight on women and how powerful and courageous they can be. It’s time that the rest of Bollywood follows suit.

Disha Saxena

[email protected]

Feature Image Credits – Forbes

Each one of us has encountered various stereotypes since childhood. It begins with pink is for girls, blue is for boys, and goes up to women work in the kitchen, men work outside. These stereotypes put people in a box and it’s necessary now, more than ever, to break these walls down.

Since time immemorial, gender based stereotypes have occupied primal importance especially when it comes to beauty. Forget putting makeup, taking care of your skin is also considered feminine and ‘girly’. When such hard lines have been drawn, it gets even tougher and important to break through and express yourself irrespective of the sex we were assigned at birth.

Being a ‘beautiful’ female has been resonated with having plump soft skin, a curvaceous hairless body, extensive knowledge of makeup, impractical outfits, wearing heels, and, so on. You must have come across incidents where a guy offered a woman his seat or a brother carried the shopping bags for his sister. When fragility is associated with being female, it becomes problematic. On the other hand, for a male, stereotypes range from having a muscular body, keen attraction towards girls, sports, cars, and bikes to showing no interest in shopping, and wearing the same prototype of an outfit regularly (a.k.a. t-shirt, jeans, and shoes). “Boys don’t cry”, “Man up”-are regular phrases used to motivate a gloomy boy. What becomes more perplexing is when the current generation continues to enforce and internalise these stereotypes.

In order to shatter these stereotypes, we need to be proactive. Firstly, we need to re-educated ourselves and stop associating femininity with girls and masculinity with boys. A person’s sex and their behaviour are independent of each other. For boys who want to try makeup, they can get start with a mascara and a tinted moisturiser, working their way upwards. For girls who are not comfortable with their long hair, can get them cut short, bit by bit. The idea is to embrace our femininity or masculinity in ways that makes us happy and we are comfortable with. While these are baby steps that one can take, they are equally important.

One of the biggest reasons we are afraid to experiment is we are afraid of getting a reaction. What will my friends say? What if they mock me? What will our neighbours think of me? What if someone laughs at me in the metro? These are some usual thoughts that might bother you but that shouldn’t stop you. After all, David Bowie, a gender-bending musician, wouldn’t have been the legend that he is, if he would have been bothered by the opinions of some meddling and annoying aunty in his neighbourhood. Life is short and it’s time you are unapologetically and beautifully you.

 

Feature Image Credits: Paul Windle

Varoon Tuteja
[email protected]

Recently, with the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein being accused of sexual misconduct by various female celebrities, including Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie, Ashley Judd, etc, we are bound to think about the ugly insides of this superficially glamorous industry. All of woman kind, from the subjugated woman working silently in the kitchen to the A-listed women with the commanding personality seen on the bigger screen, everyone at some point has been victim to patriarchy and male chauvinism.

In all of history, the film industry, primarily Hollywood and it’s Indian compeer, Bollywood have been reinforcing sexism. Over sexualizing and objectifying the female characters has always been a marketing strategy. Women in the film industry are often seen as a sum of their sexuality, rather than their talent.

The sexism existing in the film industry is too transparent. In mainstream commercial Bollywood films, the institutionalization of the “item” songs, derogatory lyrics, dialogues like “Marriage se pehle ladkiyan sex object hoti hain aur marriage ke baad they object to sex” – Kambakkht Ishq suggest the blatant sexist nature of the industry, while depicting the idea that the ultimate goal of the woman is to satisfy the male gaze. In this adulterated industry, too often the commodification of women is sugar coated in the form of entertainment.
In an entertainment driven country like India, things seen on screen have a great influence on the larger audience. The over sexualized content, results in the increasing brutality against women. “For most Indian men, social interactions with the opposite sex are severely limited. What they see on screen guides much of their perceptions of women,” opined journalist Ruchika Tulshyan on Forbes. “Portraying women as sex objects has far-reaching ramifications from normalizing eve-teasing and stalking, to glorifying rape and murder.”

Other than being constantly objectified, actresses also encounter other problems in the face of this corporate misogyny like the disparity in the wage gap, where an actor is paid more on the sole basis of the fact that he is a man. The idea of the male breadwinners is outdated but the paychecks do not reflect that, because the pay is not at par. The women in the industry are also verbally and sexually harassed. A little cleavage turns into sensational news, interview questions directed towards knowing which of their co-stars would they rather sleep with, or being propositioned with various decadent conditions for a role.
The position of female actress in the film industry is a strenuous one. She is made an object of scrutiny. Where everything she does bears numerous repercussions. Barring few exceptions, mainstream cinema in India “has a “patriarchal, sexist and misogynistic” character,” says Ranjana Kumari, Director of Centre for Social Research and member of the National Mission for the Empowerment of Women . “Our cinema exploits the Indian psyche and the mindset that has sexist notions about women’s bodies and this is used and exploited by cinema. Barring some films, where women have been in lead roles or acted as protagonists, in most cases, women are used as a representation of good bodies. This is done to titillate,” she adds.

 

Feature Image Credits: Tes Teach

Trishala Dutta
[email protected]

On the morning of 4th October, an image was posted by Pinjra Tod – a collective against the sexist and discriminatory practices in higher educational institutions – on its Facebook page. The image was of a poster from Hindu College, which said “Hindu mein Maal aur Maal dono milta hai”. In Hindi, the word “maal” is a slang term that is used to either refer to women in an objectifying manner, or to refer to narcotic substances.

An excerpt from Pinjra Tod’s caption sums up the view of those aghast at the language used in the poster thusly: “The many ways in which patriarchy reinforces itself every day in our campuses to convey the message that we may be studying in a university, we may be sitting in classes together, but women are to be primarily seen as sexual objects of exchange amongst men.” The poster almost seems to be bragging about the presence of women in the college, who are apparently not to be treated as equals or as peers of same intellectual calibre, but primarily as objects for men to lust over. Women are used here in the same breath as addictive substances, indicating that both are objects for pleasure. What adds to the whole issue is the fact that the poster was used during a Freshers’ party, and was probably one of the first messages that the new students picked up from their seniors regarding women’s place and perception in the institute. Universities are meant to widen horizons regarding thinking openly, but the regressive poster seems to be contributing towards promoting the opposite.

The Prime Minister of the college’s student union, Brijesh Tiwari, issued a statement that condemned the incident on Facebook. An excerpt from it said, “The Hindu College Parliament unanimously condemns the usage of such shamelessly gendered and misogynist phrases on campus or anywhere else. We at the Parliament consider it our utmost endeavour to arrive at a stage of gender equality, withering of misogynist practices and tendencies, and an overall climate of equal opportunities for all genders. We recognise how such phrases and their usage become an impediment in trying to achieve all of the above. The Parliament ensures that it will do its best to nip all such practices in the bud and to ensure that the student-driven crusade against misogyny must never be weakened.” Further, administrative lapses on part of the organisers and “deeply entrenched” misogyny that is “not a new innovation” were blamed.

This is, however, not the first instance of discrimination and sexism in Hindu College. Back in August, women students protested the administration over the differences in the hostel fees for men and women. The newly opened women’s hostel, in the college’s 118-year history, charged its residents more than double the fees charged from the men.

 

Image Credits: Pinjra Tod

Rishika Singh
[email protected]

The 2016 US Presidential elections have grabbed enough eyeballs already, thanks mostly to Donald Trump’s candidacy, but also to Bernie Sanders’s being a Democrat hopeful and suggesting some off-beat policies which struck a chord with most millenials, and lastly because of the possibility of Hillary Clinton becoming the first female president of the global superpower that is the United States of America. With Sanders knocked out of the race in the primaries, it’s now between former Secretary of State and First Lady, Hillary Clinton, and business mogul Donald Trump as the Democrat and Republican nominees respectively.

Despite Trump’s entire campaign featuring outrageously baseless remarks about all communities, from women to immigrants, and some entirely questionable policy suggestions (building a wall? I mean, come on), it was expected that the first Presidential debate would see productive, and frankly, grown-up, debating on crucial issues such as economic policy, international relations, racial tensions, and the like. While those issues were certainly brought up and became points of discussion, another major observation from the night was that despite the positions of power Hillary Clinton has already held and the position she’s vying for, there are certain experiences which aren’t all that different for her than they are for me, my friends, or any other woman around the world, really.

A tweet that accurately captured the entire issue.
A tweet that accurately captured the entire issue.

Trump has never enjoyed favourable opinions from women with what his constant sexist, misogynistic comments (far too many for me to even try to exemplify – try googling ‘Trump misogyny’). His attitude came out in full glory against Hillary Clinton as he interrupted her 51 times during the debate (she interrupted him 17 times), in fact, 22 times in the first 26 minutes, and a considerable number of those interruptions came when the Democrat nominee was on the clock, that is, speaking in the time given dedicatedly to her by the moderator to answer a particular question. Those interruptions ranged from blatant backtracking on stances he’s taken on issues before (global warming, supporting Putin) to just screaming ‘No’, and ‘Wrong’ into the microphone, which was more reminiscent of a petulant toddler than a Presidential hopeful. Clinton was often forced to stop mid-answer and smile as her opponent flouted etiquettes of debating and, really, being a decent human being. What’s more important to note is that she couldn’t have possibly reacted in any other way because of the double standards in terms of expectations the public holds Trump and Hillary, and generally, men and women to.  Had Clinton lashed out at Trump even for a completely justified reason, as Trump would have probably done if he had been on the receiving end of his own #manterrupting, it would have possibly been the death of her campaign. Had Clinton called out Trump for being ‘not nice’ for all the comments he made about her, as he called her out for videos her campaign has been posting to show his harmful attitude towards women, she’d have been branded ‘too emotional’ and not tough enough to be a President.  As Stephen Colbert of The Late Show summarised it, “… For Hillary to win, she had to be confident but not smug, knowledgeable without being a know-it-all, charming but not affected, commanding but not shrill. Also likeable, warm, authoritative, and not coughing. Meanwhile Donald Trump had to not commit murder – on camera.”

Hillary Clinton’s experience during the debate, and in her entire campaign, is nothing women all over the world don’t experience every day – men trying to explain basic concepts to specialists in their fields (#mansplaining), being interrupted and talked over in classrooms and workspaces, and the pressure to be better and more qualified than their male counterparts for the exact same position or role, almost like compensating for their being a woman and like it’s an implicit disadvantage. It’s something that nearly 100 million people saw during the live telecast of the debate, it was something that Hillary Clinton – a person who’s held various positions of power in her life – went through, and is also something I, a 20 year old Indian woman studying economics, discussed with my 18 year old American study-partner pursuing International Affairs at George Washington University. This experience transcends geography, cultures, age and circumstances, although it varies in degrees.

Clinton had to stand on the stage and keep her cool while talking intelligently about policies she’d support and introduce in her tenure if elected even as a man with no political experience (as opposed to nearly 30 years she’s spent in politics) lost his cool, spoke incoherently, and had the gall to say that he had better judgement than Clinton, a former Secretary of State, in terms of international policy that he had better temperament than her.

Clear double standards in the media
Clear double standards in the media

I have my fair share of issues with Hillary Clinton and her policies but I admire how she navigated everything thrown at her during the debate – from hypocritical standards to an unworthy, unprepared opponent. I also found myself relating to her when she spoke to Brandon Stanton of Humans of New York . She said, “Women are seen through a different lens… there will be men speaking before me, and they’ll be pounding the message, and screaming about how we need to win the election… But I’ve learned that I can’t be quite so passionate in my presentation. I love to wave my arms, but apparently that’s a little bit scary to people. And I can’t yell too much. It comes across as ‘too loud’ or ‘too shrill’ or ‘too this’ or ‘too that.’”

While the world is waiting to see who wins the Presidential race, it’s also important to realise what a tight, uncomfortable, and unfair spot we put the women of our world in where being ‘too much’ of anything can sound the death knell of their ambitions and where they learn to walk the tightrope between the too little and too much as second nature even before they learn to be comfortable with themselves.

Note: This article was written before the release of the tapes in which Donald Trump talks trivially about sexually harassing women, and hence doesn’t reference the issue which would have otherwise found space here.

Shubham Kaushik

[email protected]

With media coverage of the 2016 Olympics rife with sexism, it’s time to call out the perpetrators and resolve to treat female athletes better.

The 2016 Olympics has not been short on controversies or things that got people talking. From Phelps winning 28 Olympic medals and breaking records to his team-mate Lochte getting entangled in legal hassles for alleged vandalism, from Simone Biles’ feats in Gymnastics to Deepa Karmakar and P.V. Sindhu making history for India, all this with numerous doubts about Rio as an Olympics location in the background. Another major talking point during the Olympics was the incredibly sobering reality about gender equality revealed through numerous instances of sexist media coverage by major newspapers and news portals.

In a move that wasn’t just bad journalism but also generally nonsensical (but strangely not uncommon), The Chicago Tribune announced Corey Cogdell’s bronze medal win in the women’s trap shooting event by citing that she was the wife of Bears’ lineman Mitch Unrein. The Olympic medallist’s name didn’t even originally figure in the headline of an article about her win while her husband’s name did. Corey’s name was added later after backlash on social media. The situation made as much sense as it would have if Nicole Johnson, Michael Phelps’ fiancée, was congratuled for his wins, which is exactly what several news portals online did in online to prove the point.

media sexism 3

Simone Biles emerged as a star, dominating almost all Gymnastics events, yet was reduced to being called “the Micheal Jordan of Gymnastics” by the People magazine. Biles weighed in on the comments comparing her to successful male athletes in other sports by saying, “I’m not the next Usain Bolt or Michael Phelps. I am the first Simone Biles.” The statement, simple enough, also makes an important point – it is enough for female athletes to be acknowledged as successful by themselves. They needn’t be labeled as female versions of their male athletes for their achievements to count.

 

Other damning evidence came in the form of an actual debate by male sports presenters on Fox Sports on whether or not Olympic athletes should wear makeup, with one of them saying, “Why should I have to look at some chick’s zits? Why not a little blush on her lips? And cover those zits! I like to see a person who wins that gold medal go up there and look beautiful.” While it’s amusing and horrifying in equal parts that Arnab Goswami’s Newshour isn’t the only redundant news debate segment around, one can’t help but be appalled at the amount of male privilege that the presenters enjoy that made it possible for them to criticise actual Olympic athletes about their looks, which is possibly as least possible a matter of concern to an Olympic athlete as it can get. Looking pretty is not something female athletes, or women in general, owe to anyone in this world.

Media Sexism

These instances aren’t all. A recent picture has been doing the rounds of social media wherein Katie Ledecky’s world record win is the sub-heading of an article, as opposed to the headline of Michael Phelps not winning his race, which was tweeted by a woman with the caption, ‘This headline is a metaphor for basically the entire world.’ True words, indeed, when media across the world would rather focus on literally anything else other than achievements of female athletes.

While the sexist media coverage of the Rio Olympics definitely grabbed eyeballs, it is far from the first or the only time female athletes have been undermined despite excelling at their respective sports. It’s the same as women getting paid $0.75 for every dollar that a man makes, and being treated as second-class citizens. While the Rio Olympics will soon be over, they need to become a turning point in media culture towards recognising that media (and hence narratives of women in the media) is still mostly controlled by white men, and that female Olympians and the women of this world deserve to be treated better, and that the people of this world deserve better journalism.

Image credits: cbc.ca

Shubham Kaushik

[email protected]