Hi Zee (guess that's what you are called 😃 *smacks her stalkery self*) a very well articulated response to the video, now if only the video had put across its message with this much clarity.
Hello Cineraria. Sorry, I don't know your name 😊
But I "choose" to accept your interpretation of it, which sounds quite nice actually, how I wish I didn't have to disagree with it, sadly I do, with a few things at least. I am certainly not here for an argument but a healthy discussion and hope I'd be afforded that.
Sure.
Let's first start with the part I wholeheartedly agree with, why excoriate Ms. Padukone for presenting an idea, which wasn't born in her head? She didn't write that uninspired mediocre poetry. Heaven knows how bad it could have been if she had written it herself ! (hey it could even have been other way round 😃, but the chances are slim, very slim.) The only thing for which she deserves some flak is her barely tolerable English accent, but then again I am an engineering student, I am made to hear far worse accents on a daily basis 😔 (But can you blame optimistic lit'le me? I thought I'll watch her dazzling smile for 2 minutes 53 seconds, instead I ended up cringing hearing her speak)
But still guys cut Ms. Padukone some slack, all she did was to do what she does. Act. There was a director, she was given her lines, she recited them in her best monotone, put her shampoo ad hair (or wig?) on a pretty display (the good photography merits a mention too) and was paid some shit load of money you and I can only imagine earning from a friggin recitation.
That said lets come to the crux of the matter. The not so pretty things. As you have already pointed out, this campaign is not for the socio-economically backward rural women who are suppressed, who don't mostly have the choice of pursuing a career of their wishes and much less choosing their own life partner, in my words, those who really need empowerment. The target audience are us, urban educated young women, who have access to YouTube and understand English (and perhaps even cater to Vogue's fantasy of the profligate consumer) I'll keep that in mind throughout my argument.
You said:
What empowerment stands for, and what the video was trying to emphasize, is the importance of a woman's actions to be regarded equivalently to her male counterparts. If she has sex or an affair or decides to pursue her career... she deserves to be regarded exactly like her husband would be in a similar situation. That's it. That's all there is to it. Deepika Padukone is not encouraging girls to take their tops off and cheat on their husbands in the name of empowerment.
A benevolent idea indeed, not put to practice in India. Let's take career first. Girls have 20 to 40% reservation in all colleges across the country. I study in one of the countries oldest and reputed Government engineering colleges which has 30% reservation for girls. I hail from a city (not a big city just a city) surrounded by villages. I'll give you an example that presents the general state of affairs. My state rank was 90. An upper caste boy from the nearby village (oh yeah there is caste based reservation too, in some states up to 50%, imagine a girl from a reserved category, 50% plus 30%, and the works.) so this guy's state rank was 30. We both wanted computer science. I got it, he didn't. His father is a poor farmer, mine a prof. I had access to expensive tuitions, books. He did not. I pay Rs 15,000 as annual fee, because I am a girl. He pays Rs 80,000 for exactly the same education. True, we are not treated equally.
It's a bit like affirmative action, right? I haven't lived in India for years, but this sounds very much like affirmative action to me. I can't comment on something I don't know about. We don't have gender quotas here in the states.
Sex. It's the urban Indian woman you are talking about, not a woman in Saudi Arabia and we have a choice, sure as hell we do. There are women in India who choose to indulge in pre marital sex and there are adulterous women too. But an adulterous man and an adulterous woman are certainly not treated equally.
IPC section 497, states that a man indulging in adultery may be imprisoned for 5 years and has to pay a hefty fine to the woman and family he cheated on. If the wife applies for it, she's granted divorce with much ease.
But there is no provision of any sort of how to deal with an adulterous woman. Wasn't her husband cheated? It specifically mentions, no action would be taken against an adulterous wife whatsoever.
And that is SO wrong. I agree 100% that this is wrong. If I'm against marital rape being legal, then I'm against the inconsistency between regarding an adulterous man and woman. Despite what several people think, feminists aren't blind to issues plaguing men. I recognize this and it concerns me too. My supporting a PSA about women doesn't mean I wouldn't support a PSA about men.
But I'm also concerned about our culture's insistence to label women as "pure", "untouched" and "honorable" beings. If 'boys can be boys', then by the same logic, equivalent principles should be held to women as well. Take drinking or smoking for an example. In a recent discussion, I mentioned that I enjoy a beer on the weekends. I cannot emphasize how brutally I was targeted by the men I was conversing with. When I shared my academic qualifications and a recent job opportunity I was granted, I was called a liar to my face. Because 'loose girls can't be intelligent'. These attitudes bother me, and they run rampant in our country.
That being said, sexism is an issue which concerns men and women. More initiatives need to be taken to address both their dilemmas.
There is also IPC section 498a , harassment over dowry and domestic abuse. If a woman files a complaint, her husband and his entire family (including children of age 2) would be sent behind bars immediately up to 3 years and cannot apply for bail. Because of the growing number of cases of women falsely accusing their husbands and family for personal vendetta, only in 2014 they introduced a nominal reform, they'd still be jailed, but only after a magistrate's order.
We assume though that men are never victims of domestic abuse, therefore there is no law for their protection. You'd be shocked to know the number of suicides in urban Indian males ascribed to domestic abuse. Imagine the level of despondency, they had no where to go. People laughed at them.
I say time and time again that I believe these issues stem from antiquated gender stereotypes. There's this pressure in society for 'real' men to be these strong, hardy and physically glorified beings while 'good' women remain demure, sacrificial and flexible. Putting these unrealistic expectations on people of both genders only does them more harm. It's disgusting that domestic abuse is not taken seriously by the judicial system. It's disgusting that marital rape isn't taken seriously either. I stand by that.
Why am I giving these examples, because yes, our law doesn't treat men and women equally.
Let's talk about the societal stigmas. I have your baby or not, my choice. Sure ma'am, your choice but make this clear before marriage. She may not want to be a mother but the guy could cherish a dream of fatherhood. Not a good thing to deprive anyone of their right. Because once married he too should have a little bit of say in this issue.
Oh, absolutely. I never denied that. In fact, I commented on that multiple times on Deepika's video. A woman's opinion about children must be taken under consideration before marriage, and very often it is not. I've spoken to several individuals who continue to believe that the role of a woman is a child bearer. There's a tremendous pressure to follow the body's 'biological clock' and reproduce in respective manner. A mother puts her life at risk when she gives birth, and her 'yes' is simply non-negotiable. If a man is unable to find a compromise, that is when the couple look for alternatives.
A woman can have a child, she has an option to quit her job and look after her kid, she wouldn't be labeled an incompetent employee for her choice. She also has an option to not quit and further her career, yes we do have that choice, if we didn't there wouldn't have been so many mothers who are CEOs in India itself. But what if a man wanted to quit his job to look after his child? He's labeled incompetent, people say, biwi ki kamai ki roti todta hai ghar baitha (breaks bread from his wife's income). Ever heard of a househusband?
Here is where I disagree with you. There are not 'so many mothers who are CEOs in India'. There is a disturbing gap between women and men in the work force, especially in leadership positions. Women make up just 3% of legislative, management, and senior official positions in India. Out of 323 total executive directorship positions in the Bombay Stock Exchange 100, just eight are held by women.
And actually, my dad is a stay at home father, and my family has never felt 'different' or 'betrayed by our mother'. If men are labeled in India, it goes back to that sexism which is so deeply engrained in our mindsets, not because men are incapable of tending to children. It's silly that these notions exist.
When a national newspaper has an article on Shahrukh Khan's 8 pack, with his shirtless pictures strewn all over the page, does he whine in social media saying they sexualized him, objectified him? But when it has an article over a peek-a-boo at Ms. Padukone's cleavage, she does. And what do we say? She's a woman, the newspaper should keep decency. What if Shahrukh did that? We'd say, well why else does he have all those yummy muscles then, why does he take off his shirt then, to show off right? But when the newspapers give the same logic for DP, aren't we disgusted? Remember while Sobti was promoting his movie in the mall, a guy called out, "Shirt utar ke dikha." people simply laughed, some like me found it rude, but that was it, we moved on. Could we accept if it was a woman in Sobti's place? See we all treat men and women differently. We have different expectations from them.
Objectification of both men and women is common in the media, I agree. I'd even agree that it's often and unfairly overlooked for men. But I will continue to believe that the issue is more prevalent for females in the industry. I don't know if you've ever watched the Oscars or the Golden Globes. Women are consistently asked questions solely focusing on their gowns and their manicures, and even videotaped in 360 degree "glam-cams", like they're showcasing furniture. Men on the red carpet are asked first and foremost about their work, not the designers of their tux.
Again amongst the target audience of the clip, nobody is suppressing our choices sis, that's why we have both good men and women and bad men and women in the society. We all make our choices. Both men and women are discriminated, our issues might be difference. And that's exactly what my problem with the video is.
True they do not mention MEN explicitly, but consider these line-
your sins, my virtues, my choice.
to have your baby or not, my choice.
don't be upset if I come at 4 am, don't be fooled if I come at 6.
You are my choice, I am not your privilege.
I am the snowflake, you are the snowfall.
Isn't it implicit that these lines are directed at a man? C'mon we are not that dense, it's only logical to think so. And the arrogance, the selfish streak with which the lines in purple are spoken and written irks me. You both are each other's choice and privilege. No sir, we don't answer misogyny with misandry. You aren't his superior just by the virtue of being a woman nor is he. But this is what it seems to suggest. If the video had a magnanimous motive, it clearly fails to deliver that. A major chunk of viewership is made to feel that it endorses adultery. Blaming the inability to understand the video on the viewers, is like that director whose movie was trashed by critics and public alike saying, I made a brilliant movie, people failed to understand it. No sir, it's the director's job to make people understand his work, if your video fails to deliver on that aspect, how is it brilliant? It's a poorly made video.
I didn't think the video was even close to perfect... and especially in the second half, it lost it's footing. I think the discussion it sparked and the speed with which it spread was brilliant. And I think the intent was honest and well.
Since you are an IPK fan, remember that fabulous speech K gives A while resigning, that line on haq and farz? That with every right there comes a responsibility. Similarly, with empowerment there comes righteousness. Without righteousness there's no empowerment. And as you pointed out, this video is not about righteous behavior then WHY call it Vogue Empower? Why not, Vogue- you have a choice instead?
I don't think empowerment and righteousness are necessarily equivalent. My definition of empowerment is different from yours. Steve Jobs was one of the most empowered individuals of our generation -- he had a voice and a product that reached an entire nation. Behind closed doors, he was an insufferable asshole. The fact he wasn't righteous didn't make him any less empowered... he wouldn't have made the biggest company in the world if he wasn't.
The only place where the video succeeds is making a country bumpkin like yours truly's ignoramus about fashion self aware that Vogue's impossible beauty standards have now infected India as well.
Moreover, Vogue India uploads the video and adds a question, "As a woman what's the most empowering thing you have done?"
I agree here. I'm not a fan of Vogue. They propagate unrealistic beauty standards and often use nearly anorexic looking models in their advertising. It's wrong. But I look at that PSA and detach Vogue from it. I take it for its face value.
For me, it would be a day when I take up some managerial position at Vogue, snort at it's fashion, buy a cheap leather pouch from the footpath and sport it every day to office, with my nose high, my chin high but not my heels. I'll feel immensely empowered that day.
I rest my case.
PS: Sorry for the long essay. 😳
No need to apologize. I enjoyed reading your views.
Bye
Edited by aamir18 - 10 years ago
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2
31