My morality is frolicking in Ibiza.
I just got back from work a bit ago, and rushed into the shower. I always look like a wreck by the time I'm home. Just the other day I was saying to someone how I'm so glad ICHRL doesn't have a formal dress code. I'd gotten so used to all my friends in Montreal shopping for their pinstriped suits that I'd somehow forgotten how differently things work in Bombay. In the past two weeks, I've noticed that it isn't just an ICHRL thing - in most non-corporate, non-MNC offices, a kurta and a pair of jeans qualify as work attire. And then as I was wading through the decidedly disease-ridden pools around Bandra Station - fully equipped with rolled up jeans, furrowed brow, wrinkled nose and silent curses - it hit me that there was no option but to have a dress code on the more casual side. If you're travelling by public transport, like the vast majority of Bombay-ites do, there is simply no way to escape unscathed from the dusty chaos and shoving humidity of peak hour commutes. If your face isn't greasy, your hair will be dishevelled. If your hair isn't dishevelled, the bottom of your pants will be muddy. If the bottom of your pants aren't muddy, you'll have deceitful indifference etched into your face by men "accidentally" walking into you.
That said, I had an interesting, albeit slightly frustrating day. I went to the press conference for the release of the research done on bar dancers. Basically, the study was carried out with 500 bar dancers in the city, by a group of NGOs (including ICHRL) to investigate the truth of their circumstances. It was found that an overwhelming number of women were there of their own volition. They also reported very good relationships with their bosses; apparently, any man in the audience who attempts to harass the women in any way is thrown out. People tend to ignore the fact that bar dancers are NOT sex workers - not that I think prostitution should be criminalized, but that's a rant for another day.
While I'm not denying that the occupation is potentially exploitative, it IS possible for women to be empowered within that framework. Unlike a sizeable percentage of women in this country, the sexuality of bar dancers dares to traverse the reproductive duties of married life. They cross the threshold of the patriarchal home, and challenge its authority by often being the primary bread-winners. Yes, a lot of them are unable to get other jobs due to their illiteracy, but at the end of the day, it is their bodies, their lives, their decisions. Instead of applauding the efforts of these self-sufficient women, their labour is being belittled and criminalized.
Once again, I'm not trying to glorify the profession, or deny its problematic nature. But the point is, unless the dancers are under-age or coerced into the industry, there is no reason to ban these bars. And that's exactly what the study found - These women are not always the oppressed victims we imagine them to be. They have agency, and to believe otherwise is abhorrently patronising. Since the data triumphantly proves that the government's rhetoric about "trafficking" is hogwash, it is abundantly clear that this is a "cultural" issue. While the NGOs use concrete research to dispel myths , the government and its supporters have found an eternally masterful weapon in "morality." It is conveniently overlooked, of course, that Maharastrian culture has given birth to tamasha, lavni etc which can be fairly raunchy forms of dance.
If this ban goes through merely on charges of "vulgarity," what next?
Will they ban Bollywood, which is definitely as (if not more) -"vulgar" as bar dancing which is most often just an imitation of the movies anyway?
Will they desecrate Shiv Lingas that rest in Yonis?
Will they enforce dress codes on university students? Oh. Wait. They did already.
This ban will strip thousands of women and families of their income, 'causing unfathomable economic and emotional damage. It'll also be a victory for the "culture police" that seem to be ubiquitous in this state.
One last thing before I jump off my soapbox: I'd like to wish a rapid, but torturous death to the word "obscenity" and all its relatives. Thank you.
That said, I had an interesting, albeit slightly frustrating day. I went to the press conference for the release of the research done on bar dancers. Basically, the study was carried out with 500 bar dancers in the city, by a group of NGOs (including ICHRL) to investigate the truth of their circumstances. It was found that an overwhelming number of women were there of their own volition. They also reported very good relationships with their bosses; apparently, any man in the audience who attempts to harass the women in any way is thrown out. People tend to ignore the fact that bar dancers are NOT sex workers - not that I think prostitution should be criminalized, but that's a rant for another day.
While I'm not denying that the occupation is potentially exploitative, it IS possible for women to be empowered within that framework. Unlike a sizeable percentage of women in this country, the sexuality of bar dancers dares to traverse the reproductive duties of married life. They cross the threshold of the patriarchal home, and challenge its authority by often being the primary bread-winners. Yes, a lot of them are unable to get other jobs due to their illiteracy, but at the end of the day, it is their bodies, their lives, their decisions. Instead of applauding the efforts of these self-sufficient women, their labour is being belittled and criminalized.
Once again, I'm not trying to glorify the profession, or deny its problematic nature. But the point is, unless the dancers are under-age or coerced into the industry, there is no reason to ban these bars. And that's exactly what the study found - These women are not always the oppressed victims we imagine them to be. They have agency, and to believe otherwise is abhorrently patronising. Since the data triumphantly proves that the government's rhetoric about "trafficking" is hogwash, it is abundantly clear that this is a "cultural" issue. While the NGOs use concrete research to dispel myths , the government and its supporters have found an eternally masterful weapon in "morality." It is conveniently overlooked, of course, that Maharastrian culture has given birth to tamasha, lavni etc which can be fairly raunchy forms of dance.
If this ban goes through merely on charges of "vulgarity," what next?
Will they ban Bollywood, which is definitely as (if not more) -"vulgar" as bar dancing which is most often just an imitation of the movies anyway?
Will they desecrate Shiv Lingas that rest in Yonis?
Will they enforce dress codes on university students? Oh. Wait. They did already.
This ban will strip thousands of women and families of their income, 'causing unfathomable economic and emotional damage. It'll also be a victory for the "culture police" that seem to be ubiquitous in this state.
One last thing before I jump off my soapbox: I'd like to wish a rapid, but torturous death to the word "obscenity" and all its relatives. Thank you.
posted by Auri @ 10:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home