ESL Blogs

Until recently, things were black and white for me. I was able to differentiate between right and wrong, true and false, good and bad. But within the last couple of years there has been a paradigm shift, unprecedented, in my life. And what used to exist as “stark distinctions” are “blurred lines” now.

 The menace is one, but the dimensions are myriad. And they vary from the civil war in Iraq to NaMo's public endorsement, from the  contentious issue of Kashmir to socio-cultural status of women in contemporary society, from purely theoretical ideals to practical grave realities of the societies.

 My friends and family members have found their way (Elders as conservatives and Youngsters as liberals). But for me the pursuit is still on and what lie ahead are shades of grey. They can have heated debate on the future of Penguins with decreasing size of Antarctica because of “Positive growth rate”. Albeit everyone knows that you have to draw lines and have to compromise somewhere. Unless technology cannot reconcile more with fewer (or no) greenhouse emission, the crusade against climate change will continue to fail. But there is little public interest for this.

 What makes me look bluer is their intransigence on the issue without thorough knowledge. A knowledge that is indispensable and that will deter you from making hasty comments. A knowledge that will make you reckon before you speak and will convert you from an acolyte to a radical.

 Naveen usually says, “You cannot make a person understand, if he does not want to understand.” What he euphemistically intends to project is the unfortunate (but not surprising) human instinct to defy their every actions (legitimate or illegitimate) with adroit reasoning. Prolonged reasoning becomes a belief, a deep belief becomes religion and religion is often followed by profession and practice of its rituals.

 Let me make it clear: I am not against reasoning, but when a reasoning is perception based (often biased), and ignores the broad prospects of life in the shade of personal liberty and human dignity (Many call it ego), Then it’s wrong somewhere down the line.

 This whole discussion will be futile if I will not illustrate my disillusionment by an example. I can’t recall a more fitting anecdote than the changing discourse of Indian women in the era of globalisation to illustrate my point. It is generally said and widely accepted that our past defines our present and our present lays the foundation of our future and in a broad framework. Let us first have a glimpse of Indian women’s past.

 I will begin with a thought experiment with a little imagination of the future and a little understanding of the past.

 Imagine yourself in a society (say late 19th century) where women were adjuncts to men. They did not have an identity of their own as such. They were known by the names of their husbands, sons, fathers or brothers. They were often subjugated, and were considered subordinate to their male counterparts.

 The birth of a girl was considered inauspicious, their marriage as a burden and on the death of their spouse they were condemned to be burnt alive on the same pyre (Sati).

 Female infanticides were common; dowry was prevalent, purdah system further suppressed their voice and was a part and parcel of our culture. Girls often faced discriminations in education and were not given any part of the father’s property on partition of their ancestral wealth (In Hindu culture at least). Early child marriages, polygamy aggravated the situation. Divorce and marriage at will were not present even in the fantasies of females.

 In that century it was easy to make a distinction between right and wrong (actually everything was wrong). And for reformers the debate was not on what is correct but it was on how to make the wrong correct. Now one part of the experiment is over with clarion.

 Come back to 21th century, let us begin the second part of the experiment in our own century and our own society (India is too diverse to take all sections at one time. We will confine our self with the upper middle class of an urban society).

 Most of the social evils have been abolished (I have my doubts about female infanticide), women are getting equal opportunities. And they are doing extremely well (at least in my class). They are empowered and are present in almost all the key areas of society (except security forces and mining industries). The results of board exams reveal that they are making their parents feel more proud than sons and that their education is worth spending money on.

 For a girl belonging to this class, there are 2 priorities. First is to look beautiful, fit and second is to get a better education, career. The deeds are noble as the cause, but if we go into a little depth the picture may look quite dismal (The Picture is blurred and depends on the perception).

 The definition of beautiful has been deliberately replaced by cosmetic industry, fashion designers, beauty magazines, and above all the mass media by fair complexion. The more you look dark and dusky, the more you are ugly (perceived notion). It was not endemic notion, for example in the epic of the Mahabharata, Dropadi was dark, but considered beautiful. Same was the case with Lord Rama and Krishna.

The veterans of this new notion of beauty have their vested interest in it as a multi billion industry runs on the name of “fairness creams”, Modelling industry, fashion designers and the vast market for it. A certain aura is created in the society and people want to look fair (it is reflected in the matrimonial sites as well).

 I feel disgusted because 90% of the population in this country is dark in complexion (across the line). And if such a vast majority start feeling inferiority complex because of skin colour then it’s a matter of concern for the national intellectuals/intelligentsia.

 Let’s come to the second aspect of beautiful after colour. Its figure/overweight concerns. I have a 7 year old (cousin) niece. Once we were dining together and I noticed she was picking potatoes out of the sabji. When asked, the reason was “imperils of obesity”. At the first sight you may be baffled (and to some extent impressed) by the level of awareness. But it is not awareness because after further discussion/interaction you will come to know that she has no problem with fast food from Mac’D and Dominos. She is not conscious about proteins, vitamins and minerals.

 She is not taking a balanced diet, in fact she is taking an insufficient diet and undesired pressure because of lack of knowledge. At the age of growth, one should focus on outdoor games (with lot of physical exercises), and protein rich diets. Age of 7 is certainly not the age of dieting.

 Interestingly she is more into electronic gadgets, and is often busy on mobile. You can’t get her attention ( or a sincere answer) while she is chatting. Ironically you will get a better reply on whatsapp. When I was her age I was crazy for games like hide-and-seek.

 Time has changed now. It is really difficult to say who is more correct. I do not know where this new culture is taking us or where it will end. Neither do I know where to draw the fine lines between “modern technology based life” or “old society based life”.