From Caged-Chicken to Soaring-Eagle
— Women : Then and Now —

ZK Pahrii *

Introduction : To write something on women's issue posed two great challenges for me—as a man, I looked like intruding into women's territory and as a bachelor into husband and wife's territory. Nonetheless, I do not believe in the compartmentalisation of problem and issue. I believe in the apt saying that "the personal is political."

Anything that happens to/in individual's life affects the society and whatever happens in society affects the individual. There cannot be separate issue for men and women. There is no separate private and public realm for men and women. The issue that hurts women hurts men and vice versa. Paulo Friere has aptly put, "as long as you oppress someone, you are oppressing yourself."

If men have oppressive attitude towards women, then they are oppressing themselves as that oppressive mentality would not let them stay peacefully. There cannot be wholistic liberation of humankind without the liberation of women. Hence, women's issue needs to be thoroughly discussed giving special attention to all spheres of life—economic, social, political and religious. It cannot be taken lightly as an "add gender and stir" recipe. This article is a humble attempt to underscore the changing scenario of social life.

Defining 'Good' Woman : Unlike in the past, many women are much more aware of their rights in the society today. But many of them hesitate to speak out their rights freely whenever there is discussion on women's issue. This is understandable. They want to remain as 'good' woman.

For long, women have been domesticated under patriarchal culture and norms. Gradually both men and women have internalised this patriarchal 'domesticated values' and take it for granted as 'natural' set-up of relationship between man and woman without much remonstration. In patriarchal culture, the 'good' in women is defined in terms of submission, less talk, patience, hard working, and temperance. Good women are supposed not to loiter around like men but remain in the kitchen.

They should never ever correct the mistake of her husband in public. A 'good' woman is expected to keep silent in the face of domestic violence such as scolding, beating and marital rape. Many of these defined 'good' women have injuries, broken limbs, hospitalised and even ended their life silently in tomb. Many women, although they know that there's a kind of injustice prevailing in their household, do not want to speak out openly. Men have taken advantage of this defined 'good' and continue to oppress women even today.

So far woman's value is derived in terms of relation to man—as wife, as mother, as daughter. If a man to whom the woman is attached to is an important person, she receives respect and honour. Woman who tried to define their value independently are considered 'dangerous'. An independent woman who breaks the imposed 'good' is a bad woman in patriarchal society. She is dangerous setting bad example to others.

Let me tell you of a 'good and courageous' woman but who was considered 'bad and dangerous' woman in the man's world. The woman was Queen Vashti. In one of his greatest banquets, King Ahasueras in inebriated state ordered queen Vashti, his wife (property???) to put her royal crown and show to the audience and the princes her beauty. Tradition says that she has to come before the audience naked with crown on her head (think of bikini clad beauty pageant contestants of today). She refused. The King was enraged.

Vashti, a woman, had committed great offence not only to the King but to the whole people in all the provinces of Ahasuerus. The King and all the princes were frightened "for this deed of the queen will be made known to all women, causing them to look with contempt upon their husbands, since they will say, 'King Ahasueras commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, and she did not come" (Esther 1:17).

Her refusal to obey the King's order in order to protect woman's modesty and rights was deemed a horrible and detesting act, unimaginable thing in men's world. Queen Vashti was banished from the palace. King Ahasueras also gave decree that throughout all his kingdom, vast as it is, all women will give honour to their husbands, high or low (think, what will happen if husband became mentally disoriented or a highly educated woman has to get married to an illiterate man out of compulsion!).

Anyway, woman such as Queen Vashti needs to be tamed in man's world. Such powerful and intelligent woman needs to be purged from public offices or if possible eliminate altogether (like in the case of witch hunting in Europe). In many tribal stories and myths, powerful and intelligent women are portrayed negatively by connecting them to possessing evil spirit's power. As fully human being, it is time for women to define 'good' by themselves according to their daily experiences and changing time. This will make women 'fully' human and pave way for the liberation of humankind.

Freedom of Choice and Decision : Who decides and controls how should one live. What sort of dress should be worn by men and women? Among the Meitei (Manipuri) community, girls are advised (imposed) to wear phanek (mekhala). Those who impose this rule on women justify their stance on the ground of maintaining and enhancing local economy (market) as these phaneks are manufactured locally. It is also justified on the ground of maintaining one's identity (culture).

Those liberated Meitei women who refuse to comply with this rule are being punished or shot by self-imposed 'law enforcers'. It's surprising that there is no such dress code imposition on Meitei men. It appears that men can preserve their culture by using traditional dresses only on certain special occasions.

Similar imposition of dress code can be seen among the Muslim and Christian women too. Muslim women are not only obliged to wear veil (purdah) but also cover their body completely in worship lest their visible body parts might divert the attention of men to sinful thought while worshiping God. Some Muslim women were punished for not using burqa.

In the Christian Churches, women are not allowed to stand in the pulpit with dresses that are inappropriate to men's judgment especially Jean pants and tight outfits. Such enforcement, they say, is necessary to maintain decorum in worship. In no way such rules are equally imposed on men in the worship services.

Do not think that I am trying to liberalise everything. The point here is imposition of different rules on the ground of sex difference. If men are free to decide what to wear according to their choice, why can't women do the same? Do men think that women are too weak to make any worthy decision for themselves? Not only in dressing but there were attempts to modify women's body by men such as binding of foot, enlongation of neck, pressing of breast with hot pestle to keep it small, woman genitalia circumcision, etc.

Do women of today have control over their own body? There is the question of choosing career too. Does a woman have as much freedom as man in choosing a profession to pursue? One may also add here the concern of choosing life partner and setting up a family? Does a girl have freedom like boys in choosing life-partner? Does a girl have freedom to decide when to get marry?

What I am sharing here may appear a trivial thing and hence a wastage of time. But in the larger context, this is all about one's dignity and status. It's all about equality and inequality. It's all about mobility. With certain type of dress, you cannot move freely (eg phaneks) and hence freedom of movement is restricted. It's all about freedom—the freedom of choice, decision and movement. It's all about developing life according to one's convenience to its fullness without any hindrance.

Bad News for Men? If men have concern for the well being of women, it cannot be a bad news. But if they are against women, feminist movement will certainly itch their ears. It is not possible for the oppressors to be happy when the oppressed people started to fight for their rights and freedom. Indeed, women are no longer going to remain within the ambit of men's control. Women are moving out from their traditional cage (confinement) because of education, profession and changing economic system.

Although modern education did not really raise the status of women to that of men, it has remarkably enhanced women's mobility. Women look for jobs in different parts of the country not just confining to kitchen chores. They are becoming a soaring Eagle, looking around at men's world with prying eyes—a real threat to man's world. Never like before, today, men's fetters of 'moral policing' towards women is loosening widely with the changes of time.

Easy modes of communication like mobile phones and internet are providing newer, secretive and trickier engagement platforms for men and women. Today it has been on record that the ratio of men and women indulging in extra-marital affairs is 50:50. Ten years ago it would be 70 per cent men in such relationships. A survey conducted across India's leading call centres shows that 38 per cent accept pre-marital sex while 25 per cent had, at some point, indulged in casual sex.

Our parents may not like to hear this kind of news. However, the approach to life has changed. Along with eating and drinking habits, sexual behaviour too has become globalised, where pursuit of pleasures isn't taboo anymore. With this many women have no hesitation to go freely with many men. This same woman today can kill her husband or lover if he proves to be an inconvenient obstruction to her larger scheme of things. But what is surprising is the way our society judges such crime.

If a husband murdered his wife because of her extra-marital affairs, it is not a surprise. On the other hand, when wife murders her husband because of his extra-marital affairs with another woman, it's considered a condemnable act. This simply shows that 'this is man's world, where women are restricted to act and live freely like men do."

There are highly literate and educated men who cannot handle many such 'empowered women' and that leads to a lot of tension within marriages or relationships today. If it's the unbridled desire for power and lust driving women to crimes of passion, then it's the desire of men to bring women under their control that is driving men to murder. Many husbands justified their use of force against their wives/daughters on the ground of her being "sexually unfaithful."

As financially independent women now have more opportunities for social networking outside marriage, husbands are on a shorter-fuse. "Men's expectation of fidelity and monogamy from women is absolute. She is seen as the property of the man". This is simply unacceptable to today's women and she displays this rebellion by trying to be casually friendly with many male friends, often leading to terrible consequences within the family.

Conclusion : Time has changed and so has the approach to life. Along with this, value system and lifestyles (be it food, dress, sexual relationship, etc) are also changing. Traditional values and meaning of life are slowly giving way to contemporary values and lifestyles. We need to recognise this fact and adapt to it accordingly.

Today, treating women as men's property is as dangerous as hiding fire in one's pocket. Freedom of choice and decision is an essential part of the right to life which should not be deprived from anyone. There is an urgent need to exert pressure on men to cultivate the feminine qualities of women for the fact that it would be too dangerous to visualise a world with masculine images (qualities). This will not only enhance life of everyone but also bring harmony in our society.

We must welcome the 'Change' that has come to stay with us. It is of no use to be stubbornly refusing to accept the changing scenario of our world especially that of women by submitting persistently to the past. Only by paying proper respect and freedom to women can a society achieve greatness. No nation can progress or attain greatness by neglecting its womenfolk, just as a bird cannot fly only on one wing.