The Plight of a Man

 

Of late the Sabarimala issue has been playing on my mind, sometimes mildly and sometimes wildly.

That's how it is with most HSPs (Highly Sensitive Person, yes, there really is such a thing as this. The theory of HSP was propounded by an American Psychologist- Dr. Elaine Aron)

So before we go ahead it's important to let you know what the issue is, if you still don't know what it is. 

This is an old issue as I got to know through Youtube, where videos on this issue have been there for the last 5 years or so, so it clearly is an old issue but I only woke up to this recently. Even though I had heard of it on and off through the news and read of it in the newspaper I had never really thought of going deep to understand what it is.

The issue is of a temple of Ayyappa Swamy in Kerela where women of certain age groups, like the SC put it, 10-50 years of age, are not allowed to enter. Now the court explicitly stated this age bracket to make things clear in black and white. However, the real issue was not pronounced here and that's what has irked women from all over India especially the non-believers because the believers have been following the faith for centuries and it's easy for them to accept it. 

The real issue, as per believers (and we have to listen to them here because they are the ones who really matter in this issue) is since the presiding deity of that particular temple is a Naishtika Brahmachari he has decided to stay away from women. Mind you, he never said anything about the menstruation of a woman, he only said that he doesn't want to see any woman because that is a rule he has imposed upon himself. The clear focus here is not on the menstruation of the woman but the nature of celibacy of the presiding deity of the temple who has set a rule for himself.

And, this rule is only for this particular temple and that's the reason He chose to stay in the jungle, away from the civilization. 

There are 4 other temples of this God where everyone is allowed. And, one temple where only women are allowed, and the poor men are not even protesting. 

There are certain temples (general, not Ayyappa specific) where only transgenders are allowed and they have made it very clear to both men and women to stay away from their sacred private spaces, and it would be in the best of our interests to respect their decision regarding this.

A girl child under the age of ten or till the time she comes of age is considered a Goddess and all the cultures across India worship them in Navratri especially and even on other days. And the women beyond the reproductive ages are considered Mothers to all so that makes them mothers. And that's the reason these two groups are allowed in the temple after they have followed all the other rules of the temple. 

So, I hope the issue is clear here. It has nothing to do with the menstruation of the women but the oath taken by the deity to keep away from all women who are not children or Mothers.

Now, let's see this. What is it that makes rape a crime? Even if we keep aside the moral, social, political, and constitutional rights aside, the ONE thing that makes it sacrilegious is the fact that the wish of a woman has been trampled upon. She did not wish to have sex with a certain man and yet he forced himself on her. This woman surely has sex with another man/men but in this particular instance, this sexual activity becomes a rape because a man has FORCED his will on her. Whether it's a sex worker or a wife the rule of rape is the same- if a woman is unwilling to have sex with a man and yet that man forces himself on her that's rape. Technically, it is. I don't think there is a counterargument to this.

It is like Amitabh said in Pink " No means NO"

Now, let's reverse the case, what if the same thing happens to a man? Will we say, it's not rape? Well, it still is, because in this case the wish of that man has been trampled upon.

Forget about any other man, even if your own husband or father has to ask you to stop meeting him because he doesn't want to meet you will you not stop it for the sake of his choice and your self-respect? Even if you still have the moral and legal right to force yourself on that man will you not keep away from him for the simple fact that as a normal human you respect his wish?

Now, let's forget we are talking of a God or any other man, let's make it even more real. Will you accept a woman forcing herself on your father, brother, husband, friend, boyfriend, son, uncle, any man, just think of any man you love, how does it make it different? A rape is a rape for the sheer fact that someone's wish has been trampled upon by the other. 

Then shouldn't the same logic be applied to Ayyappa Swamy? 

I am not even talking of religion, constitution, female insensitivity, or anything else I am just talking of someone's will. Must we sacrifice our human traits in the name of progressiveness and modernity? 

How can women, who are so sensitive to their own privacy and modesty, crush someone else's right to privacy and justify it in the name of human/women rights? 

Out of the 6 Ayyappa Swamy temples women are not allowed only in this one because this particular God wants to follow his oath of celibacy. It has got absolutely NOTHING to do with the menstruation of a woman. 

And the right to enter the temple is falsely claimed by women to whom that God is not even dear because those who see Ayyappa as their son/friend/God etc still respect his oath and keep away from the temple.

Must we really trample upon and mercilessly crush the traditions, which are sacrosanct to thousands of devotees, in the name of being progressive? Is the sensitivity of women who don't even love this God greater than the emotions of those who have loved him since times immemorial?

Must we exercise our rights even when we don't really need them?

In Nagesh Kukonoor's "Dor" when Gul Panag gives money to her father-in-law and he asks her to keep some of it because he thinks that her husband has earned it and so it's her right to keep some of the money, she gives a beautiful reply - "Haq hai, zarurat nahin." It is my right but not my need. 

Do we cease to remain humans when we progress? Does our need to claim our false rights become greater than the true emotions of scores of others? 

If sacrificing being human is the cost of modernity and progressiveness then were we not better off in Adam's cave?

BRINGING UP A SON

“Papa why don’t you come with us. You’ll be safer and healthier in town where we have ample medical facilities. Moreover, it’s really difficult for us to visit you here in the village,” said the eldest son to the ailing old father.

“No, I am fine. And I like to live here,” answered the old man.

“But papa, your health is falling and you certainly need regular medical care and that’s not possible here, in this village,” pitched in the second son who also had a well paid job in another town much like his elder brother.

“I said I am fine here. You people do not bother about me and carry on with your busy lives,” retorted the old man.

“Papa they are right, why don’t you go with them. You will be safer, healthier and happier there,” pleaded the youngest son who hardly earned anything at all.

“If you want to throw me out of your house why don’t you say that clearly,” screamed the father at the youngest son.

“No papa, I dint mean that,” mumbled the young fellow.

“Then what did you mean. Just keep shut,” I am going nowhere, the old man passed his verdict.

And, so the two sons from town went away to their respective houses and their well paid jobs.

“I had only wished that our father went away because it hurts me to see him live in the wretched condition that I keep him in. My poems can hardly feed any of us here,” confessed the youngest son to his wife.

She wept silently as she empathized both with her old and ailing father -in-law as well as with her poet husband.

She had, on many occasions,  been witness to many of her husband’s poem sessions where not just men but even women and kids stood rapt at the recitation of many of his Maithili poems. And, she had even seen many of them wipe their silent tears with their aanchar and their dhoti as they clapped away as he stood there glorifying Sita- the young maithil daughter of king janak. And, what about that play of words which left kids and adults alike in splits over his haasya kavita.

But, in reality she knew that his poems and the joys of his avid audiences were not enough to feed his family.

“Babuji,” she told her father -in-law, “both the jethji were right in asking you to live with them, that way you would at least get two wholesome meals a day.”

“And what about you and your kids here, how will you manage without my pension? Don’t you know that whoever keeps me gets my pension?

“I am not going anywhere from here. Now go and get me some tea,” ordered the old fellow as he sat their reminiscing his own poem sessions which had enthralled the entire village during each durga pooja all these years.

“I will not leave him hungry who nourishes my poems,” thought the old fellow, satisfactorily, to himself.

THE PURCHASE

“Papa I want 25 pounds”

“What for?”, questioned the irate father who found it difficult to make ends meet in this new country which had earlier seemed to hold a dream of golden future for him.

“Papa, there was this renowned author who’d come to our school and his books are on offer. So if I buy 2 of his books worth 25 pounds I get one of his books for free, autographed by him.”

The father was even more furious to know that the little menace was spending on luxuries.

“Books by a renowned author hunh? Why don’t you break open your piggy bank and fund your own purchase. You get your own pocket money every month for trivial issues like this then why bother me? Just fund your own purchase.” Thundered the father.

“Ok papa,” she said and went away with a spring in her steps.

She then broke open her piggy bank and funded her own purchase.

Later on reflection and introspection the father found his anger much unfounded.

“She asked for books and I sued her away. Books inculcate good values in kids and they therefore are the responsibilities of parents so it is I who should be buying books for her.”

“I’ll give back the 25 pounds to her,” he told his wife.

The mom rushed to give the piece of good news to the little girl.

“No mama, it’s ok. Papa was right; I must use my own pocket money for my own purchases because if papa has to pay for things like these he will have to cut down on his own pocket money, right? So, ask him not to worry about that purchase,”she said as she happily played away her Casio.