‘We are born with spiritual understanding’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Saturday, August 12, 2006 21:22 IST
Film-maker Shekhar Kapur looks deep into his inner self, saying he can detach himself and question everything he does
You have become increasingly spiritual after Bandit Queen. Was there a turning point in your life?
I believe we are all born with a spiritual understanding. As children, we see the universe is born of Leela, and is at play. In order to comprehend society, we begin to edit out things that become confusing, and when the consciousness comes into conflict with the individual, ego is born.
Children are born into consciousness because their sense of the imaginary and the real is not distinct. Spirituality is as much a path of unlearning as it is of learning.
As a child I would sleep on my terrace in Delhi and, looking at the infiniteness of the stars my consciousness was split into a schizophrenic understanding of the dual—finite and infinite realities. I have always had to contend with the imagined. At 26, I wrote a half-novel that was never quite published on the theme. I have written short stories and poems to express it. All my films are linked by the theme of loss of innocence. It is a sense that has been accelerated because I don’t quite understand the society in which I live.
Your spiritual poetry and writings reflect thoughts on your daughter. What’s been her impact on you?
As a father, I have come to recognise the unconditional love I feel for my daughter. It expands beyond her and in the process it de-crusts my soul.
When you experience love like that, your soul becomes flexible. It begins to shake and dance and flow and the crust that has formed over it through time begins to crumble. The debris shakes off. Maybe I want to leave her something to know me by when she grows up.
What do you live by? What spiritual urges channel your creativity?
What has shaped me is agony. You agonise, you act, you succeed, you fail, and through that agony you question the existence of reality, of desire, of joy. For me, it is necessary to drop individuality.
I find my individuality is my greatest prison. Who I am is shaped by the context in which I am placed. I question who I am when pulled out of context. The answer to that is out of context, I’m not.
Are you running from the context in which you were—Bollywood?
No, I will not, have not withdrawn. At the end of the day we all need that context to be. I am human, not a saint. I live in a way that many would term ‘immoral’.
The difference is that I am able to detach myself and question everything that I do. Spirituality does not make one a better person. The assumption of one being a better person is in itself a victory of the ego.
And how does this newfound understanding of consciousness impact you?
Consciousness is nothing more than a state of being. It has no purpose, unlike everything we imbibe with it.
Do you separate you, the director from you, the self, and your achievements?
People talk of the Big Bang. If there was a beginning, there must be an end. But there is no linear time, so where is the end? I call it the Big Laugh. Someone laughed ‘ha, ha ha’ And between the first and the second ‘ha’s, came a few billion years.
What I create has an identity that is separate from what I am. There are some who, instead of creating, block creation by their being. I find it important to allow creation to flow through me. Masoom, Bandit Queen, Mr India, they all exist with identities of their own.
How big an influence is Deepak Chopra?
I read no books, I follow no gurus, I visit no temples. Deepak Chopra is a friend, but I’ve never read a book of his.
He’s an amazing guy, he can quote you masters on any subject. He gave me the confidence that I was not mad. That it wasn’t me. It was others who didn’t get it.
Have you found a path that works best?
I have no answers. All I have are questions, and more questions, and more questions. This universe is Shiv’s tandav, the dance of unorganised chaos-spewing creation and destruction randomly as it is danced.
When you give in to the chaos, maybe, just maybe, you bring yourself into harmony with the unpredictable.
Monday, April 30, 2007
EDIT PAGE INTERVIEW: James Laine: I don't Apologise/ Jan 14, 2006
‘No. I am not apologising for the books’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Saturday, January 14, 2006 21:35 IST
The books 'Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India' and 'The Epic of Shivaji' have been banned by the Mahrasthra government after descendants of Shivaji protested. The scholarship of the author James W Laine has been trashed and there are now demands that he be extradited. Laine, a professor of religious studies in the US candidly fields Gayatri Jayaraman’s questions on freedom of speech and historical perspectives.
Your first book Hindu King was banned in 2004 and the second, actually a precursor, was banned recently. Was the first work available all this while with no controversy? How do you react to the bans?
Yes, it has been available in India since 2001. The precursor is primarily an English translation of a Sanskrit epic poem Shivaji himself commissioned (the Shivabharata). Since it is the work of a court poet and its sole purpose was to glorify Shivaji, it’s hard to see why it would be controversial. Given the second controversy, one can see how people might interpret the first book in the same light. I understand that the cause for offense was the use of the word “oedipal”. I used the word to highlight the father-son conflict theme rather evident in the text, but it was taken as an explicit comparison to mythical Greek hero Oedipus.
You had apologised for inadvertent controversy, but are you apologising for writing the books or for theories and facts in them?
No, I am not apologising for the books. Both are honest works of scholarship not intended to be offensive to anyone. If it were my intention to defame Shivaji, why would I translate a 340 page text the sole purpose of which was to glorify Shivaji?
Marathi scholar Bhalchandrarao Patwardhan challenges some of your facts and refutes your theories. How do you respond?
These critiques assume that my primary purpose was to re-write the history of Shivaji, whereas the purpose was to understand the forces that shape the way the stories are told. I am interested in how historical, and some not-so-historical ‘facts’ are shaped into a morality tale. I don’t believe Patwardhan ever took seriously its real purpose. One notes his lengthy refutation of the idea that Shahji was not Shivaji’s biological father. I never made such a claim which a careful reading of the book would make clear.
The reason I wrote “unthinkable thoughts” was because I believed the impulse to read the story as a patriotic tale or a religious morality tale is so strong, it becomes impossible to get into a different frame of mind. So I am not surprised some critics still reject the work so vehemently. Please note that no critic writing for a peer-reviewed academic publication has attacked the book.
Who did you meet in the course of research—other scholars, descendants who protested? Were they aware of your earlier book and the research? Why did the protest not erupt in the research phase?
Since some people who helped me with Marathi or Sanskrit had to later take police protection, I cannot mention names. During the research phase, I was more concerned with gathering data than with analysis. It is my analysis that has caused controversy. Except for a few scholars who understood the nature of my inquiry, most people in India assumed my work was an act of devotion rather than an exercise in critical scholarship.
You mentioned you hoped for debate and criticism, not condemnation. Since the first controversy has your work ever been academically challenged? Have facts contradicting yours emerged? Do you accept or refute them?
There is one area where I believe my work is flawed. Although I discuss the writing of Mahatma Phule, in light of recent conflicts, I see I underestimated the continuing influence of his critique of brahmin bias in writing about Shivaji. I am of course accused of colluding in that bias, a fact I vehemently deny. Otherwise, I think it has held up pretty well.
Has your reading of the history suffered for a lack of understanding of the cultural environment as alleged? Were you an outsider looking in?
I do not believe in framing things as insiders and outsiders. Clearly the big fight is between brahmins and Marathas. Both are “insiders.” I got caught up in this fight and became a convenient target. I wrote the book for other scholars, Indian and non-Indian. Within that community, the book has been well-received. Criticisms have come from a different audience who never accepted the scholarly premises.
Does history change according to perspective? Or is cultural context crucial to its interpretation?
Of course. History is always a story. The big issue is not simply the recording of facts, but the way they are used in a narrative. My real interest is in reflecting on the nature of that narrative and its motivations. Is it to inspire devotion? Serve the nation state? Criticise a particular religion or group? These are in a sense second-order questions, but perhaps the all-important ones, nonetheless.
What expectations did you have for your work in Indian scholarly circles? Surely, you must have foreseen it would make waves?
I hoped it would receive a respectful response and it did. Traditional scholarship was an act of following one’s guru, and transmitting ancient knowledge faithfully. Modern scholarship is about creative new responses, “making waves.” One hopes to “make waves.” One does not, however, hope to be banned, indicted or cause acts of violence.
How have the bans impacted your perception of India/Maratha culture and history? Do you continue your research in this field?
Yes. I no longer concentrate on Maharashtra as I do not foresee a time when I can research there. My Marathi gets rustier by the day. But I will always been interested in India.
Do you think controversy has actually helped stir interest in this field of study?
Unfortunately, there has been more heat than light. Of course, now scholars realise it is unwise to research any subject related to Shivaji.
There have been calls for your extradition and arrest. Do you fear for your safety and your research?
I have received threats and thus would not visit India, but otherwise I do not fear harm. I have re-oriented my research to broader themes that do not require fieldwork in India.
Your view on the practice of banning in democratic societies?
Scholarship depends on the free exchange of ideas and book banning would be intolerable in the USA.
What’s your next book on?
I am working on the relationship of religion and politics in the context of empires. It begins with reflections on Mauryan Emperor Ashoka.
Gayatri Jayaraman
Saturday, January 14, 2006 21:35 IST
The books 'Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India' and 'The Epic of Shivaji' have been banned by the Mahrasthra government after descendants of Shivaji protested. The scholarship of the author James W Laine has been trashed and there are now demands that he be extradited. Laine, a professor of religious studies in the US candidly fields Gayatri Jayaraman’s questions on freedom of speech and historical perspectives.
Your first book Hindu King was banned in 2004 and the second, actually a precursor, was banned recently. Was the first work available all this while with no controversy? How do you react to the bans?
Yes, it has been available in India since 2001. The precursor is primarily an English translation of a Sanskrit epic poem Shivaji himself commissioned (the Shivabharata). Since it is the work of a court poet and its sole purpose was to glorify Shivaji, it’s hard to see why it would be controversial. Given the second controversy, one can see how people might interpret the first book in the same light. I understand that the cause for offense was the use of the word “oedipal”. I used the word to highlight the father-son conflict theme rather evident in the text, but it was taken as an explicit comparison to mythical Greek hero Oedipus.
You had apologised for inadvertent controversy, but are you apologising for writing the books or for theories and facts in them?
No, I am not apologising for the books. Both are honest works of scholarship not intended to be offensive to anyone. If it were my intention to defame Shivaji, why would I translate a 340 page text the sole purpose of which was to glorify Shivaji?
Marathi scholar Bhalchandrarao Patwardhan challenges some of your facts and refutes your theories. How do you respond?
These critiques assume that my primary purpose was to re-write the history of Shivaji, whereas the purpose was to understand the forces that shape the way the stories are told. I am interested in how historical, and some not-so-historical ‘facts’ are shaped into a morality tale. I don’t believe Patwardhan ever took seriously its real purpose. One notes his lengthy refutation of the idea that Shahji was not Shivaji’s biological father. I never made such a claim which a careful reading of the book would make clear.
The reason I wrote “unthinkable thoughts” was because I believed the impulse to read the story as a patriotic tale or a religious morality tale is so strong, it becomes impossible to get into a different frame of mind. So I am not surprised some critics still reject the work so vehemently. Please note that no critic writing for a peer-reviewed academic publication has attacked the book.
Who did you meet in the course of research—other scholars, descendants who protested? Were they aware of your earlier book and the research? Why did the protest not erupt in the research phase?
Since some people who helped me with Marathi or Sanskrit had to later take police protection, I cannot mention names. During the research phase, I was more concerned with gathering data than with analysis. It is my analysis that has caused controversy. Except for a few scholars who understood the nature of my inquiry, most people in India assumed my work was an act of devotion rather than an exercise in critical scholarship.
You mentioned you hoped for debate and criticism, not condemnation. Since the first controversy has your work ever been academically challenged? Have facts contradicting yours emerged? Do you accept or refute them?
There is one area where I believe my work is flawed. Although I discuss the writing of Mahatma Phule, in light of recent conflicts, I see I underestimated the continuing influence of his critique of brahmin bias in writing about Shivaji. I am of course accused of colluding in that bias, a fact I vehemently deny. Otherwise, I think it has held up pretty well.
Has your reading of the history suffered for a lack of understanding of the cultural environment as alleged? Were you an outsider looking in?
I do not believe in framing things as insiders and outsiders. Clearly the big fight is between brahmins and Marathas. Both are “insiders.” I got caught up in this fight and became a convenient target. I wrote the book for other scholars, Indian and non-Indian. Within that community, the book has been well-received. Criticisms have come from a different audience who never accepted the scholarly premises.
Does history change according to perspective? Or is cultural context crucial to its interpretation?
Of course. History is always a story. The big issue is not simply the recording of facts, but the way they are used in a narrative. My real interest is in reflecting on the nature of that narrative and its motivations. Is it to inspire devotion? Serve the nation state? Criticise a particular religion or group? These are in a sense second-order questions, but perhaps the all-important ones, nonetheless.
What expectations did you have for your work in Indian scholarly circles? Surely, you must have foreseen it would make waves?
I hoped it would receive a respectful response and it did. Traditional scholarship was an act of following one’s guru, and transmitting ancient knowledge faithfully. Modern scholarship is about creative new responses, “making waves.” One hopes to “make waves.” One does not, however, hope to be banned, indicted or cause acts of violence.
How have the bans impacted your perception of India/Maratha culture and history? Do you continue your research in this field?
Yes. I no longer concentrate on Maharashtra as I do not foresee a time when I can research there. My Marathi gets rustier by the day. But I will always been interested in India.
Do you think controversy has actually helped stir interest in this field of study?
Unfortunately, there has been more heat than light. Of course, now scholars realise it is unwise to research any subject related to Shivaji.
There have been calls for your extradition and arrest. Do you fear for your safety and your research?
I have received threats and thus would not visit India, but otherwise I do not fear harm. I have re-oriented my research to broader themes that do not require fieldwork in India.
Your view on the practice of banning in democratic societies?
Scholarship depends on the free exchange of ideas and book banning would be intolerable in the USA.
What’s your next book on?
I am working on the relationship of religion and politics in the context of empires. It begins with reflections on Mauryan Emperor Ashoka.
Tamil Brahmins are the new minority/ May 21, 2006, DNA
Gayatri Jayaraman
Sunday, May 21, 2006 00:13 IST
Mumbai: “The only person in the state to oppose reservations and to insist no new categories be added to it is me, and I have no takers” says Cho Ramaswamy, journalist and political commentator.
“Forget Jayalalithaa, even a paper like the Hindu will never oppose reservations in this state because the minority - the forward classes - have no voice.”
The reason behind the success of reservation in the state, he says, is its brilliant use as a political tool to sway the majority vote bank and the ‘pathetic state’ of the minority community.
“Reservations in Tamil Nadu have been in place seen pre-independence from the time of the justice party. Hence the electorate is accustomed to it more than any other state,” he says. All political parties in Tamil Nadu support reservation without opposition.
Very few statistics are available on the state of the ‘forward community’ in Tamil Nadu. P V Indiresan, a Padma Bhushan awardee and former director of IIT Chennai, says, “I am in Delhi because of the reservations in Tamil Nadu. My immediate family and of those I know have all migrated from Tamil Nadu to other states or other countries and will never return.”
On December 27, 2005, the Tamil Brahmin Association, headed by N Narayan, submitted a proposal before the state government seeking 15 per cent reservation for Brahmins in educational and governmental institutions.
Nothing, not unexpectedly, came of it.In Tamil Nadu, Backward Castes (BC) get 30 per cent reservation in educational institutions, Most Backward Castes (MBC) 20; Scheduled Castes (SC) 18; and Scheduled Tribes (ST) one per cent. The 1,224 medical seats then get divided into 354 for BCs; 247 for MBCs; 226 for SCs; and 13 for STs.
The rest of the 384 seats are allowed as open competition, where everyone competes, regardless of community. In 2005, the final tally released by the Directorate of Medical Education indicates only 28 students from the `non-reserved’ or Forward Caste (FC) have got into government medical colleges, representing about 2.3 per cent.
Are Brahmins a minority in the state and should reservations be extended to them? “Brahmins were always a minority,” points out Prakash, a financial analyst in a leading multinational firm.
“Their focus was always on education. So when they were denied that, they just left and began to find it elsewhere.” While few grudge the righting of a historical wrong, many fear the lack of educational opportunity will shut the door on them.
Sunday, May 21, 2006 00:13 IST
Mumbai: “The only person in the state to oppose reservations and to insist no new categories be added to it is me, and I have no takers” says Cho Ramaswamy, journalist and political commentator.
“Forget Jayalalithaa, even a paper like the Hindu will never oppose reservations in this state because the minority - the forward classes - have no voice.”
The reason behind the success of reservation in the state, he says, is its brilliant use as a political tool to sway the majority vote bank and the ‘pathetic state’ of the minority community.
“Reservations in Tamil Nadu have been in place seen pre-independence from the time of the justice party. Hence the electorate is accustomed to it more than any other state,” he says. All political parties in Tamil Nadu support reservation without opposition.
Very few statistics are available on the state of the ‘forward community’ in Tamil Nadu. P V Indiresan, a Padma Bhushan awardee and former director of IIT Chennai, says, “I am in Delhi because of the reservations in Tamil Nadu. My immediate family and of those I know have all migrated from Tamil Nadu to other states or other countries and will never return.”
On December 27, 2005, the Tamil Brahmin Association, headed by N Narayan, submitted a proposal before the state government seeking 15 per cent reservation for Brahmins in educational and governmental institutions.
Nothing, not unexpectedly, came of it.In Tamil Nadu, Backward Castes (BC) get 30 per cent reservation in educational institutions, Most Backward Castes (MBC) 20; Scheduled Castes (SC) 18; and Scheduled Tribes (ST) one per cent. The 1,224 medical seats then get divided into 354 for BCs; 247 for MBCs; 226 for SCs; and 13 for STs.
The rest of the 384 seats are allowed as open competition, where everyone competes, regardless of community. In 2005, the final tally released by the Directorate of Medical Education indicates only 28 students from the `non-reserved’ or Forward Caste (FC) have got into government medical colleges, representing about 2.3 per cent.
Are Brahmins a minority in the state and should reservations be extended to them? “Brahmins were always a minority,” points out Prakash, a financial analyst in a leading multinational firm.
“Their focus was always on education. So when they were denied that, they just left and began to find it elsewhere.” While few grudge the righting of a historical wrong, many fear the lack of educational opportunity will shut the door on them.
EXCLUSIVE MAIN EDITION LEAD: Wardrobe Malfunctions: Accident or Design? April 02, 2006
Gayatri Jayaraman
Sunday, April 02, 2006 01:37 IST
MUMBAI: Underneath the clothes is a seamy story. Fashion’s biggest week ripped to reveal more than flashes of bosom and derriere — MMS clips, blame game, and rumours of publicity stunts.
Police chief AN Roy denied receiving an official complaint, but ‘wardrobe malfunctions’ on three successive days of the Lakme Fashion Week brought the event under a cloud. Turn to p18
“It’s hard to rule out a publicity stunt,” said Pradeep Hirani of Kimaya, a key Indian buyer. “But then a friend from Norway saw it on the news. It’s put Indian fashion on the map. If they can have a Janet Jackson, we can have ours.”
While all lauded the models’ grace under fire, some weren’t too sure about the designers. “The designer-model relationship is one of trust,” said designer Lascelles Symons. “A new model might begin to distrust her designer, wondering if rumours are true.”
Symons, who himself started out as a model, said he does not know how to make it up to Gauhar Khan, who was modelling his skirt when the zipper came undone. “I asked her to stop by my store and pick up a dress,” he said. “But she’s afraid the media would make something of her coming to the store. So she said she’d rather have it sent to her place.”
Khan was livid at being caught on camera. The MMS clips doing the rounds have just made it worse. “It’s not the designers who are doing this to me, it’s the media,” she fumed. “Designers have mothers and sisters and wouldn’t do this to me. Some said I didn’t wear underwear. Don’t they know models wear thongs?”
Designer Narendra Kumar believes such incidents are not good publicity and only reflect bad workmanship. “If it is a publicity stunt, it’s very wrong,” he said.
Nevertheless, designers in Delhi are jittery. “The designers showing on day one have been told to pull in the celebrities after Bollywood walked the Mumbai ramp,” said a member of the Fashion Design Council of India.
Sunday, April 02, 2006 01:37 IST
MUMBAI: Underneath the clothes is a seamy story. Fashion’s biggest week ripped to reveal more than flashes of bosom and derriere — MMS clips, blame game, and rumours of publicity stunts.
Police chief AN Roy denied receiving an official complaint, but ‘wardrobe malfunctions’ on three successive days of the Lakme Fashion Week brought the event under a cloud. Turn to p18
“It’s hard to rule out a publicity stunt,” said Pradeep Hirani of Kimaya, a key Indian buyer. “But then a friend from Norway saw it on the news. It’s put Indian fashion on the map. If they can have a Janet Jackson, we can have ours.”
While all lauded the models’ grace under fire, some weren’t too sure about the designers. “The designer-model relationship is one of trust,” said designer Lascelles Symons. “A new model might begin to distrust her designer, wondering if rumours are true.”
Symons, who himself started out as a model, said he does not know how to make it up to Gauhar Khan, who was modelling his skirt when the zipper came undone. “I asked her to stop by my store and pick up a dress,” he said. “But she’s afraid the media would make something of her coming to the store. So she said she’d rather have it sent to her place.”
Khan was livid at being caught on camera. The MMS clips doing the rounds have just made it worse. “It’s not the designers who are doing this to me, it’s the media,” she fumed. “Designers have mothers and sisters and wouldn’t do this to me. Some said I didn’t wear underwear. Don’t they know models wear thongs?”
Designer Narendra Kumar believes such incidents are not good publicity and only reflect bad workmanship. “If it is a publicity stunt, it’s very wrong,” he said.
Nevertheless, designers in Delhi are jittery. “The designers showing on day one have been told to pull in the celebrities after Bollywood walked the Mumbai ramp,” said a member of the Fashion Design Council of India.
Women Criminals on the rise?/ Sept 17, 2005, DNA
They're more victims than criminals
Gayatri Jayaraman, DNA News
It will never quite be the same to be a woman in Mumbai again. Sharmila, Amishi, Preeti, and Tarannum have, perhaps, forever changed whatever little the inelegant ladies storming railway compartments at peak hour did not.
A diploma holder in advanced computing, Tarannum Khan is the latest to be thrust into the limelight. A little over a year ago it was Sharmila Shanbag, the first ever Indian woman to be extradited from Germany with an Interpol Red Corner notice. In between, came the elitist Amishi Vaish (who kidnapped Vaibhav Agarwal, the 16-year-old son of Mumbai-based stock broker Ramdev Agarwal), and the bewildering Preetii Jaiin (who is alleged to have paid a 'supari' to the underworld to murder film director Madhur Bhandarkar).
This could well have a little bit of history. In 1975, feminist theorist Freda Adler in her 'Sisters in Crime' stated her belief that the 1970's second wave of feminism consequently coincided with a 'dramatic' upsurge in women's criminal activity. Has the wave caught up with Mumbai, too?
Prayas director Vijay Raghavan, a field action project of TISS and one of the few NGOs working for women prisoners within state prisons, differs. "I wouldn't correlate it quite so simplistically, but it is symptomatic of the social migration of women. It is said society creates crime, and individuals commit it. Crime is a complete economic system. There is a demand for it and hence there is supply." Hence, he says, there is little logic to projecting Tarannum as a criminal in a society of which she is probably also a victim.
"Any marginalised community may rise against its oppressors to get even, but that does not erase the facts of its marginalisation," points out a feminist voice - filmmaker Madhushree Dutta.
"Let's not forget that though Preetii Jaiin and Tarannum are being painted as criminals now, the fact remains that both were victims." Preetii, an alleged victim of the casting couch, in itself a huge crime, and Tarannum of the exploitation of sexuality by bookies and bar life. Crimes that both attempted to control, but failed. Both remain pawns in the system they fight.
"The media is extremely harsh to women in crime. Their motives are sought and held up to scrutiny, but few ever question the social process behind it," says Raghavan. Working for over 15 years, he has derived that the dividing line is not between the women with economic motives and those without, but rather the social migration of women with or without support.
"The woman with support remains protected by the system despite its apparent inequalities, but the one who breaks away, whether an educated woman who needs to assert individualism, or an economically backward one who needs to fend for her family, also moves away from the protection that the family, typically the male domain, provides. In this process, the woman is more prone to negative influences."
Raghavan believes that women thrust or 'liberated' into supportless social situations, often have little actual choice in the matter. "A woman with no social support becomes dependent on the relationships she builds in the process of social migration. Being active in taking charge of their lives, these women were often exploited by the relationships they built with the people, such as middlemen, who allowed them to break away, and socially migrate. Women in such situations tend to think 'even if I have nothing else, at least I'm making money' and they hold onto that until the social support they hope for, most often in the form of a dependable man, who may or may never come their way."
Raghavan still believes crime essentially remains a man's domain. "Despite all the hype, let's not forget that women commit only 5% of the crime in Mumbai and probably only 1 to 2% of that in other places.
Gayatri Jayaraman, DNA News
It will never quite be the same to be a woman in Mumbai again. Sharmila, Amishi, Preeti, and Tarannum have, perhaps, forever changed whatever little the inelegant ladies storming railway compartments at peak hour did not.
A diploma holder in advanced computing, Tarannum Khan is the latest to be thrust into the limelight. A little over a year ago it was Sharmila Shanbag, the first ever Indian woman to be extradited from Germany with an Interpol Red Corner notice. In between, came the elitist Amishi Vaish (who kidnapped Vaibhav Agarwal, the 16-year-old son of Mumbai-based stock broker Ramdev Agarwal), and the bewildering Preetii Jaiin (who is alleged to have paid a 'supari' to the underworld to murder film director Madhur Bhandarkar).
This could well have a little bit of history. In 1975, feminist theorist Freda Adler in her 'Sisters in Crime' stated her belief that the 1970's second wave of feminism consequently coincided with a 'dramatic' upsurge in women's criminal activity. Has the wave caught up with Mumbai, too?
Prayas director Vijay Raghavan, a field action project of TISS and one of the few NGOs working for women prisoners within state prisons, differs. "I wouldn't correlate it quite so simplistically, but it is symptomatic of the social migration of women. It is said society creates crime, and individuals commit it. Crime is a complete economic system. There is a demand for it and hence there is supply." Hence, he says, there is little logic to projecting Tarannum as a criminal in a society of which she is probably also a victim.
"Any marginalised community may rise against its oppressors to get even, but that does not erase the facts of its marginalisation," points out a feminist voice - filmmaker Madhushree Dutta.
"Let's not forget that though Preetii Jaiin and Tarannum are being painted as criminals now, the fact remains that both were victims." Preetii, an alleged victim of the casting couch, in itself a huge crime, and Tarannum of the exploitation of sexuality by bookies and bar life. Crimes that both attempted to control, but failed. Both remain pawns in the system they fight.
"The media is extremely harsh to women in crime. Their motives are sought and held up to scrutiny, but few ever question the social process behind it," says Raghavan. Working for over 15 years, he has derived that the dividing line is not between the women with economic motives and those without, but rather the social migration of women with or without support.
"The woman with support remains protected by the system despite its apparent inequalities, but the one who breaks away, whether an educated woman who needs to assert individualism, or an economically backward one who needs to fend for her family, also moves away from the protection that the family, typically the male domain, provides. In this process, the woman is more prone to negative influences."
Raghavan believes that women thrust or 'liberated' into supportless social situations, often have little actual choice in the matter. "A woman with no social support becomes dependent on the relationships she builds in the process of social migration. Being active in taking charge of their lives, these women were often exploited by the relationships they built with the people, such as middlemen, who allowed them to break away, and socially migrate. Women in such situations tend to think 'even if I have nothing else, at least I'm making money' and they hold onto that until the social support they hope for, most often in the form of a dependable man, who may or may never come their way."
Raghavan still believes crime essentially remains a man's domain. "Despite all the hype, let's not forget that women commit only 5% of the crime in Mumbai and probably only 1 to 2% of that in other places.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Rape Law biased against men?/ 18/5/2006
Rape law biased against men? [DNA News]
‘Solution does not lie in dismissing the law or taking away its teeth’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Rajesh Ahire, brother of Kamlesh Ahire, a 21-year-old gymnast falsely accused of rape by an infatuated teenager, who served nine days in jail, is still under medication and counselling for trauma. He can answer no questions, trembles with fear at the memory, and pleads to be left alone. His brother’s good looks, muscular physique and Olympic ambitions, he says have changed his close-knit lower middle class family forever.
On April 3, 2006, Sunil More was convicted of the rape of a middle class college student and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Twenty-seven witnesses, identities closely guarded and well protected by a police force under severe media and public scrutiny, undoubtedly contributed to this conviction. On October 19, 2005, barely a few months after the Marine Drive rape case, a 15-year-old ragpicker was raped, also by a police constable, Chandrakant Pawar, also in Mumbai. Soon forgotten by the media, justice is yet to be done in the second case.
Given the circumstances, is the Supreme Court ruling placing the woman’s word in a case of rape as truth beyond the pale of medical evidence a loose cannon against the innocent, or an overdue sword against the guilty? Some fear misuse of the law just as, they claim, IPC 498a, has been misused. Save India Family Foundation, launched from Silicon Valley and with a large subscription of harassed techies, petitions against 498a and hails the July 20, 2005, Supreme Court Bench decision that warns against ‘legal terrorism’. Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice HK Sema said “Dowry law is a shield, not an assassin’s weapon…. The court would like to go on record that for noting that educated women are approaching the courts for divorce and resorting to proceedings against in-laws under section 498a IPC, implicating not only the husbands but also their family members whether in India or abroad. This is nothing but misuse of the beneficial provision intended to save the women from unscrupulous husbands.”
Bikram Jeet Batra, legal officer of Amnesty International India, reacting to the judgement observed “The solution does not lie in dismissing the law or taking away its teeth completely by making it compoundable and bailable,” and professed Amnesty’s support for the law.
According to the National Bureau of Crime statistics, 58,121 cases were booked under 498a in 2005, an increase of 14% over the previous year. Compare that to the same report’s 1,54,333 cases of crime against women for the same period. According to the State Crime Records Bureau, “One rape occurs in the state every six hours.” Given the statistics, the ruling must surely be welcomed?
Veena Gowda, women’s right activist and lawyer dismisses concerns. “Every law is abused to an extent, 498A is highlighted because it aids women. And if you look at the statistics of how many women die within marriages, are beaten up, sexually abused, and compare that to the number of 498A cases filed, you’ll find it is underused, not misused.” What this ruling offers women in a world where a report is often treated with disbelief, she says, is an assurance that shoddy medical examinations and the absurd excuse of lack of witnesses-rapes don’t occur in public view, but in private spaces-will no longer delay or banish justice.
Harish Sadani, of Men Against Violence, who worked closely with Kamlesh, is glad for the justice the Supreme Court ruling will bring to abused women, after all MAVA was founded on the premise of 498 A, to include men in the solution. “But even gender-sensitive lawyers are getting sceptical of 498A now and advise male clients to apply for anticipatory bail,” he points out. “498A has been misused. It is essential to end the character assassination that a woman who cries rape is subjected to, but it is also necessary to guard against misuse of the law. It is not desirable to depend solely on her views,” he warns.
‘Solution does not lie in dismissing the law or taking away its teeth’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Rajesh Ahire, brother of Kamlesh Ahire, a 21-year-old gymnast falsely accused of rape by an infatuated teenager, who served nine days in jail, is still under medication and counselling for trauma. He can answer no questions, trembles with fear at the memory, and pleads to be left alone. His brother’s good looks, muscular physique and Olympic ambitions, he says have changed his close-knit lower middle class family forever.
On April 3, 2006, Sunil More was convicted of the rape of a middle class college student and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Twenty-seven witnesses, identities closely guarded and well protected by a police force under severe media and public scrutiny, undoubtedly contributed to this conviction. On October 19, 2005, barely a few months after the Marine Drive rape case, a 15-year-old ragpicker was raped, also by a police constable, Chandrakant Pawar, also in Mumbai. Soon forgotten by the media, justice is yet to be done in the second case.
Given the circumstances, is the Supreme Court ruling placing the woman’s word in a case of rape as truth beyond the pale of medical evidence a loose cannon against the innocent, or an overdue sword against the guilty? Some fear misuse of the law just as, they claim, IPC 498a, has been misused. Save India Family Foundation, launched from Silicon Valley and with a large subscription of harassed techies, petitions against 498a and hails the July 20, 2005, Supreme Court Bench decision that warns against ‘legal terrorism’. Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice HK Sema said “Dowry law is a shield, not an assassin’s weapon…. The court would like to go on record that for noting that educated women are approaching the courts for divorce and resorting to proceedings against in-laws under section 498a IPC, implicating not only the husbands but also their family members whether in India or abroad. This is nothing but misuse of the beneficial provision intended to save the women from unscrupulous husbands.”
Bikram Jeet Batra, legal officer of Amnesty International India, reacting to the judgement observed “The solution does not lie in dismissing the law or taking away its teeth completely by making it compoundable and bailable,” and professed Amnesty’s support for the law.
According to the National Bureau of Crime statistics, 58,121 cases were booked under 498a in 2005, an increase of 14% over the previous year. Compare that to the same report’s 1,54,333 cases of crime against women for the same period. According to the State Crime Records Bureau, “One rape occurs in the state every six hours.” Given the statistics, the ruling must surely be welcomed?
Veena Gowda, women’s right activist and lawyer dismisses concerns. “Every law is abused to an extent, 498A is highlighted because it aids women. And if you look at the statistics of how many women die within marriages, are beaten up, sexually abused, and compare that to the number of 498A cases filed, you’ll find it is underused, not misused.” What this ruling offers women in a world where a report is often treated with disbelief, she says, is an assurance that shoddy medical examinations and the absurd excuse of lack of witnesses-rapes don’t occur in public view, but in private spaces-will no longer delay or banish justice.
Harish Sadani, of Men Against Violence, who worked closely with Kamlesh, is glad for the justice the Supreme Court ruling will bring to abused women, after all MAVA was founded on the premise of 498 A, to include men in the solution. “But even gender-sensitive lawyers are getting sceptical of 498A now and advise male clients to apply for anticipatory bail,” he points out. “498A has been misused. It is essential to end the character assassination that a woman who cries rape is subjected to, but it is also necessary to guard against misuse of the law. It is not desirable to depend solely on her views,” he warns.
Prayas report labels bar girls 'human trafficking'
Tuesday, September 20, 2005 12:41:00 AM
Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo must be obtained from DNA.
Prayas report labels bar girls ‘human trafficking’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Think about it. You're a single woman, with two kids in primary school. An HR consultant gives you a job, takes large chun
should you not be as beautiful as some of your colleagues, and the job gives you grief. You'd quit? According to a new repor
just couldn't.
Crorepati bar girl Tarannum is fast becoming unrepresentative of the mass of women in the business, states a field action r
by Prayas, a field action group of Tata Institute of Social Sciences and one of the few NGOs working directly with prison cells.
The report spent the last six months studying bar girls at the Protective Home for Women, Chembur, the Kalyan prison, the S
Home for Minor Girls, Deonar, at bars and in their homes. The study examined entry processes, socio-economic situations,
and alternatives after the ban.
Vijay Raghavan, director of the project, squarely calls the business “trafficking”, claiming it fits the definition of the term
Protocol of 2002, key being the exploitation of a person in 'a position of vulnerability'.
"The findings of our study illustrate that these were not women who went into this business out of choice. We recommend th
taken against middlemen. The women urgently needed to be provided night shelters — they are very vulnerable now," he said
Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo must be obtained from DNA.
Prayas report labels bar girls ‘human trafficking’
Gayatri Jayaraman
Think about it. You're a single woman, with two kids in primary school. An HR consultant gives you a job, takes large chun
should you not be as beautiful as some of your colleagues, and the job gives you grief. You'd quit? According to a new repor
just couldn't.
Crorepati bar girl Tarannum is fast becoming unrepresentative of the mass of women in the business, states a field action r
by Prayas, a field action group of Tata Institute of Social Sciences and one of the few NGOs working directly with prison cells.
The report spent the last six months studying bar girls at the Protective Home for Women, Chembur, the Kalyan prison, the S
Home for Minor Girls, Deonar, at bars and in their homes. The study examined entry processes, socio-economic situations,
and alternatives after the ban.
Vijay Raghavan, director of the project, squarely calls the business “trafficking”, claiming it fits the definition of the term
Protocol of 2002, key being the exploitation of a person in 'a position of vulnerability'.
"The findings of our study illustrate that these were not women who went into this business out of choice. We recommend th
taken against middlemen. The women urgently needed to be provided night shelters — they are very vulnerable now," he said
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)