Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Don’t misuse gang-rape case!


By Vinod Varshney


The simple Delhi gang-rape case is being converted into a cause célèbre by different  interest groups to suit their assorted needs and purposes. Thus social groups, feminist bodies, political parties etc. are out to extract maximum mileage out of it or promote their hobby horse. Media is also using the issue to increase its TRP. In this free-for- all the fear is that the central idea of cutting rape incidents and ensuring justice to victims might get mangled.

May be, there is a spurt in rape cases in recent years, but in fact rape incidents in India are 20 times less than in developed countries. Basically, it is a patent menace in the west. Compared to India’s 1.8 rapes per lakh of population there were 27.3 in the US, 28.8 in the UK, 63 in Sweden and 79.5 in Australia in 2010, according to UN statistics. This fact, however, should not detract us from fighting this crime and shame tooth and nail. But how do we go about it?  We do not agree on many points.
 For instance, feminists demand complete autonomy of female body devoid of all moral and social control. But the next step is dreadful commoditisation of sex! Commoditisation of beauty has already become the norm in globalised society. It leads to free use of  beauty (female body) in ads and direct sales.

Let us look at another point. Deep in the shadow of the glittery world of pubs and discos, is a class of people who struggle hard to eke out a living. Hundreds of millions thus work in inhuman conditions for a pittance. In the Delhi gang-rape case the accused teenager had left his parental home at the age of eleven to earn his livelihood in dhabas and ghettoes. The brutally abusive environment prepared him (we create him) for nothing but a criminal future. No wonder he did not understand the finer divisions of morality, ethics, culture and law. To correct him and his kind, our feminists’ suggestion is to change the mindset of men! Not reforming the system, because that is not easy. We always look for the easy way out.

The focus of debate, therefore, must shift to making punishment more stringent. There also we see no consensus. The Verma panel on the basis of memos received from the public suggested certain concrete measures. But the government always knows best. So, throwing out all inconvenient suggestions of the panel the government hastily prepared an ordinance and asked the President to sign which he obligingly did.

The feminists (and many others) had to reject the ordinance because what they sought was not there. The feminists particularly wanted to outlaw rape within marriage. Many do not agree; inclusion of marital rape in the proposed Bill, they argue, is devoid of even the basic rationale.  If there is rape in marriage, where does marriage fit in? The demand is dangerous to the institution of marriage and will destroy family life as we know.  Unfortunately feminist approach is influenced by dangerous western thinking. It is bound to make more single women  crave for male company and cause more divorces!
The idea of consent for sex in the name of autonomy of female body is preposterous as it is an exercise in commoditisation of sex and an effort to get a tool for blackmailing. The feminists should rather shift their attention to positive values of social development. The attempt to use the gang-rape to distort society norms needs  to be condemned by all.

(Note: The article was first published in the February, 2013 issue of monthly magazine 'Lokayat')

Ominous Footfalls of a Horrific Crime

By Vinod Varshney

Who can oppose the harshest of punishment for a rapist? But making an inhuman law and not having safeguards against its misuse defeat its purpose. The task to eliminate the root causes of crimes against women is as difficult as they are varied. So the lawmakers chose the easy path: to enact a stringent law, more so because it was perceived as vote catching too. All parties barring a few jumped at it. BJP leaders appeared more feminist than feminists themselves in their game of one-upmanship.

Many felt the law was enacted in a hurry, without requite, wider debate. Even when it was debated in the Lok Sabha general apathy was palpably visible in the skimpy attendance and indifferent participation. Many women for whose safety the law was enacted said it was lopsided and discriminatory.

A good law ought to ensure punishment of the guilty and make safeguards against harassment of the innocent. Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan showed the sense to say in parliament that the anti-rape Bill was anti-male and its provisions made men vulnerable to its misuse. Sumitra Mahajan of the BJP also cautioned against its widespread misuse. Sharad Yadav feared that the law could be misused if a love affair ended on the rocks. Women activist Madhu Kishwar pointed out that it was gruesome to make a law according to which having sex meant either marriage or jail for the next 10 to 20 years.

Even consensual sex has been vitiated by gender-bias. After indulging in consensual sex, if a girl changes her mind and does not want to marry, she can just walk away. But the boy, he can be booked as a rapist. If a married couple breaks up, the matter ends in divorce, rather than sending the husband to jail on rape charge; but this cannot be done if a breach occurs during the live-in relationship, or courting.

In short, the law as passed can only create an environment of hostility and suspicion between man and woman. It destroys the mutual attraction between the two sexes—the universal, beautiful gift of nature-- on which the succession of all species depends.

Alas! Many NGOs who not only seek funds from abroad, but also import damaging habit, behaviour and ideas give women only broken marriages, spinsterhood and everlasting bitterness. Today in France many men and women (their number is increasing) do not want to marry: they prefer unromantic live-in relationship to wedded bliss. Even if they marry, two out of three couples end up in divorce.

The situation in the US is worse. There the institution of marriage which normally signifies the union between man and woman has been reduced to a prosaic business contract. They make and break them any number of times. People await with interest the US apex court verdict --likely to come in June-- on same sex marriage. Nine out of 50 states in the US have already recognised same sex marriage. Surprisingly 58 percent of people support it. If we continue to ape the west, the same trend may come to India as well. But where will children come from?

The brutal rape case of December 16 last is indeed pregnant with surprises. One has already come from Mysore University: it has allowed reservation in admissions to rape-victims! Such mindless indulgence can pervert society and induce a woman to declare herself a victim of abuse for the sake of claiming a university seat!! What next is the question.....



Note: The article was first published in the April, 2013 issue
of 'Lokayat' magazine.