“Protection” of Rights

Last year, the Indian Parliament passed various “Protection of Rights” Bills that the BJP claimed would benefit women and queer communities, but in reality, make matters far worse for them. In 2009, the Delhi High Court had passed a judgment decriminalising consensual homosexual activity between adults in private. In 2013, a Supreme Court judgment re-criminalised homosexual acts. Finally, in 2018, it was decriminalised again. In 2014, the Supreme Court had passed the progressive NALSA judgment that affirmed the right of all Indian citizens to self-identify their gender. In another backtracking, last year, the Indian Parliament passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, that violates this right to self-determination of gender by requiring certificates of gender change to be produced to the District Magistrate.

Specific to violence, the Act punishes sexual violence against trans persons with lower sentences (from 6 months to 2 years, plus a fine) than equivalent sexual crimes against cisgender women. In keeping with the reality that trans women are women and the democratic notion that equivalent crimes should receive equivalent punishment, powerful campaigns were launched against the Act by trans activists. This included regular press conferences, protests, a petition to the President to not sign the Bill, and storming social media with advocacy around how the Act is harmful to the lives of trans communities.

A protest against the Trans Bill

In 2017, the Indian Supreme Court had deemed instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddah) as unconstitutional. Following this, last year, the Parliament, through the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2018, also declared the practice of triple talaq as illegal, making it a punishable act. During the public campaign against the criminalisation of triple talaq, women’s rights activists released a statement appealing to the Members of Rajya Sabha to “completely withdraw the Bill and significantly re-draft it in the interest of Muslim women.” Due to the less privileged socio-economic and cultural conditions of women, they often do not have the same access to education and jobs as men. Hence, the financial support from a woman’s marital home is often the only source of income for her to raise her children and run a home. Feminists argued that by putting the husband behind bars for triple talaq, he would be unable to pay for the woman’s maintenance and support the family. The Bill (now Act) is hence not in the best interests of Muslim women and does not strengthen their negotiating capacities. It is just another space in which the Indian state can now be violent towards Muslim men.

To the not-so-keen bypasser, these “Protection of Rights” Acts sound like they are intended to benefit marginalised communities. But persons from these same communities have led the opposition against the Acts, revealing their truly draconian impact on those intended to be protected by this legislation.

Schemes and Funds

The Modi government has also launched some women-centric schemes, their most popular one being the beti bachao beti padhao (BBBP) scheme, launched in 2015 for the survival, protection and education of the girl child. This is the scheme that most people on the Right point to when they make the case for how Modi has been good for women’s rights in India. By the start of 2019, the government had allocated Rs 648 crore for the scheme since its launch. Of this, it was found that at least 56% (about 364 crore) was spent on “media activities.” A majority of the resources under the BBBP scheme were focused on “building a perception of change rather than initiating measures for actual change on the ground.” That is exactly why so many people intuitively and strongly believe that the BJP has worked towards women’s progress. Though the ground reality remains that last year, it was reported that not a single girl was born in six months across 16 villages of the Uttarkashi district in Uttarakhand, with highly skewed sex ratio of birth in the other 66 villages of the district.

Street art under the beti bachao beti padhao scheme asking, “How will you eat her rotis, if you won’t let her be born?”

The utilisation of the Nirbhaya fund (which was set up in 2013 for the empowerment, safety and security of women and girl children) was less than 20% until last year. This year under the same fund, the State is installing CCTVs everywhere for the “safety of women,” who are historically already the most surveilled and controlled communities. There are CCTVs in public schools, and plans to introduce AI as a subject in school curriculums, but there are no sex education classes or sanitary pad machines in washrooms. The Indian state plans to address sexual violence by “tracking and monitoring” kids on camera. Many of the technological solutions supported by these funds are either dysfunctional (such as crisis helplines and One Stop Centres for medical, legal and psychological support to women affected by violence) or do not add up to a meaningful institutional support system for redressing cases of sexual violence (such as CCTVs and panic buttons).

The idea of using technology for development is deeply embedded in India’s post-colonial history, with the progress of science and technology historically being a national priority. But the state is yet to learn that technology cannot solve our social problems. Technology cannot fix what culture has broken.

She inspires us

A few days back, Modi tweeted that he would be giving his social media accounts over to “women who inspire us” for this Women’s Day (#SheInspiresUs). But which inspiring women will he hand it to? The protesting women of Shaheen Bagh who his Ministers have issued violent threats against? Gauri Lankesh who was killed by goons of the state for her powerful dissenting voice? Sudha Bharadwaj who has been framed and imprisoned for standing up for human rights? Thousands have died and millions continue to face violence every single day through this state’s actions. On Women’s Day, I don’t want Modi’s Twitter handle, I just want our women back.

I want public sex education about consent. Entry for women wherever the hell we please. Free or subsidised education. Free or subsidised sanitary napkins. Sensitivity and gender training for law enforcement officers. Structural changes and judicial reforms to make rape trials move faster. Marital rape to be criminalised. Survivors of sexual violence to be given meaningful rehabilitation and treated respectfully by lawyers and doctors. Testimonies of survivors to be believed and valued. Death penalty to be abolished. Police to be strictly kept out of educational universities. A credible mechanism to deal with complaints of sexual harassment against judges in the higher judiciary. Protection for women from defamation cases when they call out abusers. Men alleged through #MeToo to be investigated before being hired. Internet shut-downs to not be a state whim. And legislative bills, government schemes, and state funds that actually benefit women, not just claim to.

“I will do what I can and I will say what I should. These intolerant voices find strength in our silence. Let them learn to argue using words instead of threats.” — Gauri Lankesh

Ramachandra Guha writes (in 2007) in his book on the history of modern India that there have historically been four major ‘axes of conflict’ in the country — caste, language, religion, and class, in that order. Regarding gender, on the other hand, he mentions that “as an axis of discrimination, gender … has not so often expressed itself in open and collective protest.” This post has tried to highlight how in just the past one year, gender has expressed itself in open and collective protest. Given the increasing state atrocities against women and queer communities, gender has historically always expressed itself in open and collective protest. There have been fissures along the way, and struggles with solidarities, but that is true of any people’s movement in the history of the world. Gender’s expression and protest has however been given far lesser focus or been subject to selective amnesia when writing about India’s history. Today’s present will be tomorrow’s history. When historians of tomorrow look back upon this period of time in modern India, let it never again be said that women were not an organised, powerful movement to reckon with.