After watching the 1st episode of Satya meva Jayate’s 2nd season, which was based on the rape cases of India and how women has to deal after surviving rapes and there lives after, It seems the society is always there to address the issue on hand, and raise innumerable question, as to why and until when?
Research says , the motive behind rapes has not just been an act of fulfilling the lust, however, but an act of domination and pronouncement of gender-power on the fairer sex , a relief to the sore sexist egos. The rapist through the act, use it as a weapon to make the womenfolk realize that He is still the master and the superior, among both the sex. However, it has been always felt somewhere that there is more to this hypothesis, which is till here incomplete and vague, as if there are certain other facts to be realized and retrospect on. And somehow after watching the show, the answer is seem to be crystal clear to me. It is nothing else but the ‘Izzat factor’ after all. Izzat! Dignity! Honour! Sanman! A word, by-hearted, rehearsed to every women who is supposed to live and belong to a civil society. A women is supposed to be the Izzat or the Honour of a family, which might in-fact is so great to sound. It is by-hearted to us like the, multiplication tables at school, that the most important thing a women has is not her education, not her job, not her status, not her knowledge, but one only her Dignity, which she is to guard zealously at any cost, and if she loses its primarily her own fault… Is it so… ????
Picture this, a girl, in her teens, playful and beaming with energy and joy, is the pride and honour of her family, is one day gheroued by a pack of men, is than pulled down to a deserted corner, each taking turn to fill their lust and ego and empty hers, is than left to die and decay. People finds her, and the first thing they do is, wrap a scarf around her face, as if she is some contagious disease and which is again due to her very own fault. Her face is pixelated in the television, her name is not taken in public. People start calling her names. If engaged or married, all such engagements a re called off. We don’t even know the real names of ‘Damini’, or ‘Nirbhaya’ or so many others. Isn’t that itself is a slap on their raped bodies. ‘Nirbhaya’ is not just a rape victim. She is a martyr who fought till her last breathe, when so many other women commits suicide even after surviving such assaults as they are pronounced outcast by the society.
Giving these questions a little break lets first come into certain basic questions regarding women, what is a women first of all? Isn’t she just a naive, delicate, property, to be dealt away as soon as he becomes fit to be sold in the market, (isn’t she a mere property after all that is dealt between two men, the father and the groom, here in the context of Hindu Weddings, as where they call the ritual of ‘Kanyadaan’, ‘daan’ or donation is only made of a property or item, who do not have its own opinion or identity to give).
In Hindu weddings, the newly married wife is asked to touch the feet of her husband (that is, her new owner, after her father) and she is entitled to the job of taking care of him and please his and his family’s needs and desires. Technically speaking, she becomes a prominent and permanent care-taker and housekeeper, a cook, a baby producer and than the nanny, and most important, an official and valid sex object! And why is she complaining, isn’t she getting a roof to live under, isn’t she getting an valid identity, isn’t she getting security from the big bad world outside, isn’t she getting a proper lifestyle and status? Now some of the readers may strongly object while my saying this, and come up with strong dictum that the women married to a man, legally is also the co-owner of each and everything he owns. Point taken. But taking an example, why does in most cases we witness
this, that, during the later stages of a woman’s pregnancy, she is granted ‘leave’ from her in-laws, and are sent to her parents place, until she bears the child and be fit enough to join the job back at her in-laws. I am perplexed at this point that if she now really is the member of her new family than aren’t she is suppose to be taken great care of, during such a critical time, isn’t she carrying the future of her in-law’s family and who is not to receive any recognition from her parents’ side. Isnt her husband to take utmost care of her and the baby, during that stage?? Well, why would he, in fact he would rather get rid of her during that stage, as she is just not fit enough for any of his purposes. Her children that she bears, with all the pain and trouble are even not recognized after the mother, after all she is herself known by her husband. Now some may advocate this saying that in certain ‘progressive communities’ an women can always follow her maiden name any time, who is stopping her after all. But isn’t that her father’s name too (who is again a man), by the way who was her mother, thus she has a maternal lineage? Why is their only fore-fathers, where are the fore-mothers? Arent they are supposed to be counted, well not really important. Now who has so much time to keep a track on mere properties being dealt. Properties are not important, their owners are.
If so than how come such an invaluable and important an object as women, a mere property be entitled with the grave responsibility to carry something as fundamental a thing as honour or Izzat. Aren’t the men suppose to be more responsible for that too?
A lady who came to Aamir Khan show was asked certain questions on how come a raped women be the one to shoulder the guilt of the act socially, and the lady chose to answer asking Khan a question in return: If a person walking in the street is bitten by a dog, thus that person loses his/her Dignity by any chance, is it even logical? Than why it so happen that a rape victim hide her face and identity and locks herself up, when on the other hand, the rapist shows up himself in shameless attitude and confidence, during the trial. Is he after all deriving pleasure, does the verdict of punishment has any effects on him, (only if he gets to be punished), isn’t the tag of a ‘rapist’ after all an ego boast to him???
If thats so, than We, rather deny, to be the so called Izzat, of our family and society. A women herself never comes up saying on her own, that she is the honour and dignity of her family and the society. Its the society being the director and her family, the prompter of the play, who reminds her, the dialogues and act she is suppose to enact. Its time we come out of the act, and tell the director that the scene is just not happening. If the ‘izzat’ we are suppose to carry becomes our weakness rather than power, than we reject to be the Izzat of our respective families and homes. We wont hide our faces and lives. We wont let someone name us Damini or Nirbhaya after we succumb to our injuries. We shall stand with our head held high and with honour, our faces bare. Let the the world see us. When we shall not be he the object of Izzat at 1st place, than where is the point of losing it, and thus where is the question of snatching away our Izzats from us. So what will be the point of raping a women when she would lose nothing than being severely sexually assaulted. That crime would than be seen in another light of thoughts than. Point to be noted.
