Zero Sympathy for Maya - Page 4

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Although this has absolutely no connection to this discussion, I'll put in my two cents:

The 'secondary' and 'inferior' position of women in society is largely tied to the fact that they're seen as 'objects', to be owned, used and subjugated at will. Women's bodies have been long used as repositories of male honour. Ever since the days when the 'Jana' system was in vogue, tribes/groups have kidnapped and violated women of the opposing group after coming out victorious in a war. That practice continues to prevail in times of warfare/community feuds in today's world.

Rape or molestation is something which is chiefly done to 'show women their places' or 'put her in her place'. It is an instrument of gender subjugation. All of this apart from the fact that the ratio of women victim of sexual abuse vs. male ones would probably come down to something like 100:9. Now, that of course does not mean that male victims don't deserve redress for their abuse, they do. But this point sadly has no relevance in the context of this show. The victim here is the female, not the male.

In this show, the female is someone who is actively subjugated and controlled by the more powerful male character. So any sexual violence towards her should be considered as an instrument of gender oppression by the privileged and powerful male.

Hope I could explain.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Because rape, or any kind of sexual violence is done with the INTENT of dishonouring a woman. It is completely a separate issue that being raped does not make a woman 'damaged goods'.

Look at the larger issue here. Rape and molestation both reduce a woman to an 'object' with no agency. It is the worst kind of insult to any human being. It violates your mind and soul. It reduces you to a plaything with no dignity. And that's what Chandra did. He touched a woman's body without her consent.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

I did not claim that "sexual humiliation is the only kind of humiliation". Sexual humiliation IS THE POINT of this debate.

Secondly, it's not about virtue. It's about degradation. Sexual assault robs a woman (or a man) of human rights. It reduces them to playthings who have been stripped of the 'right of refusal'. Plus rape is invasive physically. It combines physical and mental humiliation in the most extreme manner possible, which no other form of assault is capable of inflicting.

About women and sexual assault, I addressed this before in a post. Sexual humiliation for women has huge significance in a patriarchal society. It is a tool meant for keeping women relegated to the position of "objects". Hence the separate degree of importance attached to it. Rape is not just "another act of humiliation or violence". It is the most degrading form of violence in ways more than one. When you are insulted in a physically invasive manner, then the effect of it is tremendous; you actually feel the humiliation burn into your soul. The psychological degradation of rape combines with physical torture to create a supremely crushing effect. It cannot be compared to anything else.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Precisely my point. Here something very important needs to be mentioned.

"Social honour" and "personal honour" are two different things. The first is a mandatory code of virtue that society imposes on women. This mindset dictates that a woman should be "pure" at all costs. Such a mentality is regressive, no doubt.

The second is the question of "personal honour".This is the feeling of honour that is integral to any person's soul; the feeling of self-respect. It is THIS honour that is so brutally violated when a woman is raped.