The issues like the cow, Hindu, Muslim, beef, triple talaq, dalits are at its height in the year 2017. Amid the above unintentional news, India, by showing the power of democracy, has elected it second dalit president- You know the name very well (censorship in media forced me to not to mention the name, so assume it). The mainstream media reports including the news broadcasts of this auspicious event, those are excluded who disagree with the word auspicious, forced me to write this.
The winter was about to pass when Donald Trump, the mad man of America as reported by media, became or to say become, the president of USA. The liberal media, let us assume it liberal at least in the meaning of the word, houses out of the USA, who were against Trump, testify that America will never give a woman any chance to be a president. I am leaving it to your judgment to consider the case of International media in the court of humanity, but I am untouched by the question of that corporate media.
Let us take a U-Turn towards India.
In all the news, views, and reviews of Indian election, the question of women is out, or to say correctly, substituted by the word "Dalit." (is there any press, national or international, that said a "woman lost in India" (I repeat only woman, not dalit). Clearly, it is a significant defeat of feminism when women are projected not as women but identified by its caste, class or religion.
A woman of any country does not belong to any class, caste or race including ethnicity as she was exploited even by the most exploited section. Whether it is Jews, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Black, Dalit or any other most subaltern, everyone was/were cruel towards their women, forcing them to stay behind the closed doors. The condition is so worse that even in the Buddhist dominated countries of Asia are not spread by this virus of the older traditions.
What the answer out of this presidential election comes out is about dalit and not about women. If we look at any data, women in India are roughly fifty percent but what is their percentage in Parliament? What about the reservation Bill that previously passed by Rajya Sabha? Why media is saying "dalit president" (whether male or female) by avoiding the most fundamental question of "women"- Remember the data that is fifty percent.
A powerful woman, I think, is more manly than the man. For example, Mayawati, Sonia, Mamta, and others are not women but man due to the power behind them. The meaning of man cannot be defined by the biological strength or any other manliness that one has towards man (macho man, Superman, Heman, so on). In fact, all words say one thing, man is "the man" because of "power." If this power is transferred to women, then they too can be a man (you are free to call it Platonic Cave, Madman's Imagination, Ivory Oriental outlook).
The above argument is for those who have power or have thrust upon power. But, what about those who are powerless? Another open end left for you to complete (what is there for my mother, sister, daughter, wife-- again I left a point to critique, why man what a mother, sister and so on).
Moving forwards, Loss of woman as a president is not a loss of a dalit woman, who by her power is not a dalit at all, but a loss of women, who despite her power failed to reserve a high post of office.
In fact, she lost not because she was a dalit it is because there were fewer females in Parliament. If the woman is powerless, then she needs a tag like dalit, but when she is powerful, she becomes a man.
Giving her same seats in parliament could, not sure, make her a man. And if she becomes man, then there will be a fight between man versus man. The question of man versus tag will automatically be eliminated. This man versus man theory is highly successful in Panchayat Election.
Today's women are in need no tag but of power that makes her equal to man. She is not designed for the proverb, "Behind every successful man, there is a woman." If she can "behind" why not "together" or even "forward."
Yes, in the final word, a man can be dalit because he was exploited, but a woman cannot because she was exploited even by a Dalit. The woman is only "woman," who has no identity and is classless, colorless, casteless, nameless, or even non-religious entity.
No comments:
Post a Comment