The coverage of Damini's death strikes a particularly ironic note following recent media controversy over a rape in Ohio
There's something uncomfortably neocolonial about the way the Delhi gang-rape and subsequent death
of the woman now known as Damini is being handled in the UK and US
media. While India's civil and political spheres are alight with protest
and demands for changes to the country's culture of sexual violence,
commentators here are using the event to simultaneously demonise Indian
society, lionise our own, and minimise the enormity of western rape
culture.
A particularly blatant example of this is Libby Purves's piece
for the Times. She says the Delhi bus rape should "shatter our
Bollywood fantasies". For Purves, westerners enjoy a romanticised view
of India, all heady spirituality and Marigold Hotels;
and especially romantic in their views, for reasons Purves neglects to
address, are the British. Thus, upright Europeans have sentimentally
ignored the "murderous, hyena-like male contempt" that Purves says is an
Indian cultural norm. Neatly excised from her account however is the
relationship between poverty, lack of education and repressive attitudes
towards women, and, by extension, the role of Europe in creating and
sustaining poverty in its former colonies. Attitudes towards women in
the east were once used by colonialists to, first, prop up the logic of
cultural superiority that justified unequal power relations (the "white
man's burden") and second, silence feminists working back in the west by
telling them that, comparatively, they had nothing to complain about.
When
it finishes calling Indian men hyenas, Purves's article states that
westerners "have the luxury of fretting about frillier feminist issues
such as magazine images, rude remarks and men not doing housework". Does
anyone else see an unattractive historical pattern here?
Her
article is not, by any means, the only one to report on this issue as if
rape is something that only happens "over there" – something we
civilised folk in the west have somehow put behind us. Elsewhere, the
message is subtler, but a misplaced sense of cultural superiority shines
through. For example, this BBC article
states, as if shocking, the statistic that a woman is raped in Delhi
every 14 hours. That equates to 625 a year. Yet in England and Wales,
which has a population about 3.5 times that of Delhi, we find a figure
for recorded rapes of women that is proportionately four times larger: 9,509.
Similarly, the Wall Street Journal decries the fact that in India just over a quarter of alleged rapists are convicted; in the US only 24% of alleged rapes even result in an arrest, never mind a conviction. This is the strange kind of reportage you tend to get on the issue.
Owen Jones's excellent piece
in the Independent is a breath of fresh air, asking people to
acknowledge that rape, as well as gang rapes, happen in the west too.
Similarly, Laura Bates's recent article on victim blaming should act as sufficient retort to anyone who thinks police chief KP Raghuvanshi's advice that women should carry chilli powder to prevent rape is symptomatic of a specifically Indian brand of misogyny.
The coverage of Damini's death strikes a particularly ironic note following recent media controversy over a rape,
in Steubenville, Ohio, of a 16-year-old girl – allegedly by members of
the high-school football team. The case is that the young woman was
dragged, drunk and unresponsive, from party to party, where she was
sexually abused. The brutal death of Damini has spurred Indian civil
society to its feet, causing protest and unrest, bringing women and men
into the streets, vocal in their demands for change. Sonia Gandhi has
met the woman's parents. The army and the states of Punjab and Haryana
have cancelled new year's celebrations. What happened in the US? In
Steubenville, football-crazy townsfolk blamed the victim and it took a blogger – Alexandria Goddard, who is now being sued – and a follow-up article from the New York Times four months after the incident to get nationwide attention for the story.
Purves's
article claims that we in the west are "looking eastward in disgust". I
believe that disgusted parties would do well to turn their judgmental
gazes on their own societies. Let's look east in solidarity and support
for India's urgently necessary women's rights movement; let's keep
talking about the social discrimination Indian women face, which
affluent westerners do not. However, it is both prejudiced and
completely fantastical to talk as though sexual violence is some kind of
Indian preserve. We might have comparatively better women's rights in
the UK, but this is due, in large part, to the social services that our
wealth allows. Colonial history helped to create and global capital
continues to sustain low standards of living in India. We would do well
to be cognisant of our historically inscribed privilege before
complaining that this horrific event has destroyed our pretty colonial
fantasies.
With thanks : The Guardian : LINK
No comments:
Post a Comment