Amid the high-pitched discussion of multitudinous issues dominating the national mindspace, extremely significant quotes caught my eye. On the pictures of male scientists celebrating the success of Mangalyaan, their contribution to science and country was appreciated; on the pictures of women scientists who too worked on Mangalyaan, the fact that they were wearing saris was appreciated. “These womens in saris are the real MODERN women of India; Here comes the Scientists in Sari! #RESPECT #Mangalyaan”.
This article should consist only of these sentences, which say it all. Unfortunately, however, we live in a wildly excitable society where you have to shout to make your voice heard, and have to do a great deal more to make your opinions count, even if they are obviously what any decent society should automatically integrate. I saw several pictures and
comments about the saris worn by women scientists at the launch of Mangalyaan, including the nauseating comments about how this was true Indian womanhood, and you do not need to wear Western clothes to achieve in science. No matter how superficial these remarks were, the general trend of the observations was frightening at so many levels because, fundamentally, they indicate a mindset which not just trivialises great work done by women — achievements in science, architecture, economy, literature and a thousand other areas outside the home — but also exhibit a total insensitivity to the problems faced by women as they work. And I do not even venture into the turbulent arena of gender discrimination.
To begin with, and to state the obvious, what on earth is the connection of those women scientists who worked on Mangalyaan, their very real achievements, and the clothes they wear? Would their achievement have counted for less if they had worn trousers to the launch?
As long as employees are appropriately clothed, their attire should never be a cause for comment. Nevertheless, from politicians to industry honchos, the clothes women wear are always the subject of comment, which, by itself, becomes a tedious occupational hazard, were it not exasperated by the fact that rather than their work, their clothes become the subject matter of evaluation. Politicians, for example. On numerous occasions concerning women politicians, the media doesn’t comment on whether Ms X made a good or bad speech on the economy or defence. There is usually more coverage of the clothes she was wearing, which never happens in the case of men.
The superficial and unthinking comments, even when made with the best of intentions, are actually dangerous and offensive for a variety of reasons. The most obvious, of course, is discrimination. If Indian attire is so praiseworthy, and naturally every single one of us loves our national attire, why do men not wear it to work? Why do men wear trousers as a matter of course, and tell women that it is not appropriate for women to wear trousers? Men do not give any thought to this anomaly because, naturally, men are different, and in their mind judged by a different standard.
Most young girls working today, whether in the fields in remote villages or on a computer in an urban office, wear salwar-kameez, which has become the universal dress for working young Indian women. It is convenient, it is easy to work in, and deal with, and is completely appropriate. Men will never understand how difficult it is to wear, maintain and work in a sari. Think of a young working girl living on her own. She has to wash her saris, hang them out to dry, press those six yards, and repeat the process every day. Laundries would be quite expensive. A young nurse looking after her patient or a doctor would find it difficult to work in a sari once they have discovered the ease of working dressed in salwar-kameez or trousers.
All over our country, men, and specifically communities dominated by men, such as village panchayats or khaps, have always tried to control the way women dress. This is not only well known but a much discussed topic, and is no more than a blatant attempt by men to control the domestic hierarchy ranging from the clothes women wear, their education, who they marry and even whether they may have a cellular phone.
Our Constitution makes women equal citizens in democracy, but de facto the struggle for control, even over their own bodies, is still very much a grim reality for most Indian women. It is a long road to travel from appreciating a woman scientist for wearing a sari to condoning honour killings of women. But the unfortunate irony is that patriarchical mindsets are so deeply entrenched, and facile cliches about women, supposedly admiring their wearing saris even though they are scientists, are so newsworthy and such an easy escape from facing the complicated issues which working women battle with every day, that people feel virtuous about making such remarks. This is by far the most fundamental problem with comments regarding women’s attire.
On this note, it has to be recorded that noted singer, K.J. Jesudas, who is respected all over the world, not just for his musical prowess but also his secular credentials, and the way he gives soulful renditions of Hindu devotional music, although he himself is of the Christian faith, created a wholly unnecessary controversy with his remarks on why women should not wear jeans. Admirers of Jesudas were shocked and offended by his absolutely unacceptable comments which were not only unwarranted but betrayed an astonishing chauvinistic mindset. I was dismayed to read news reports about his rather offensive remarks, and equally dismayed to read reports about detractors discussing the attire of women in the Jesudas family. It is so predictable that when women are attacked, it is not the perpetrator of the attack or comments, but women attached to them who are attacked in return.
We can only hope that legends like Jesudas will be more sensitive to problems faced by women, and more careful about their public utterances.
