Not all leading women thinkers in the state are on Pinarayi Vijayan's side of the 'Women's Wall'. Many have placed themselves on the other side. Some like writer Sara Joseph and Manju Warrier have even climbed from the Pinarayi side to the other.
Academic and writer J Devika said no construct could be as distorted and anti-freedom as the proposed 'Women's Wall'. Activist Rekha Raj is doubtful about the sincerity behind the move. Sakhi's Aleyamma Vijayan said she was not interested in taking part in an event decided by a set of males.
No role for women
This was an irony many women activists Onmanorama talked to pointed out. This is supposed to be a women's wall, they say. But according to them, no women's organisations in the state, not the women's wing of trade unions or even Kudumbashree, had any role in taking the decision. In short, this was a decision some men had taken for the women. Therefore, the 'wall' does nothing but cements patriarchy.
Devika just cannot understand how an event led by caste and community leaders could be called 'renaissance'. “True, some of these caste and communal outfits have to an extent helped in doing away with the ills of the traditional caste system. But it is also a historical truth that they came into being bearing all the evils of modern patriarchy. The problems suffered by women in this age, dowry for instance, came through these caste organisations,” Devika said.
Nostalgia for buried evils
This renaissance revival, as the LDF government has planned it, will only evoke the worst excesses of caste like untouchability that had already been eradicated. “The new-age atrocities that women suffer are left unaddressed, and are not spoken of. Besides the pernicious practice of dowry, women are denied the freedom of choice in marriage. And though employed, they still can't move freely,” Devika said. Rekha Raj said there was something more. “The male domination within the house has still not been challenged,” she said.
Devika, therefore, argued that the second leg of renaissance should have been motivational. It should have focussed on the gains women had achieved. “Why not talk about the success of women's literacy. Why not build on that,” she asked. “The state, along with the civil society, had a big role to play in this achievement. Why couldn't they talk of extending this legacy of welfarism in Kerala, about empowering the women to think critically and claim their rights. This way they could have taken women enlightenment to a new level,” she said. If caste hatred is at the heart of this struggle, then, Devika said, ridding Sabarimala of 'tanthri' rule should have been the rallying call.
Devika is surprised that feminists like K Ajitha have supported the 'wall' in its present form. “These highly respected feminists seem to be aware only about the caste and patriarchal domination of an old period. They refuse to look at the plight of the modern women,” she said.
Power of tokenism
As for Ajitha, it is not as if she is blind to the grey areas in the 'Women's Wall'. “At a time when Sangh Parivar forces are pulling the society backwards and there is such a mighty onslaught on women, I am only trying to stand with the people who could put up at least some resistance. Someone had to take the initiative, and the government has,” Ajitha said.
Writer and academic Meena T Pillai, too, feels that such a move, however problematic its organisation is, was welcome because it was the only way in which women could be made aware of their social situation. “I don't think religious or caste organisations were doing anything to bring about political consciousness in women,” she said, and added: The 'wall' I am sure will at least begin a dialogue.”
She also finds the 'Women's Wall' to be a powerful symbol. “We live in an age where even symbolic protests are a big step,” Pillai said. “We are talking about renaissance. The first renaissance did not address women's issues. There was a certain kind of blindness that the first renaissance had towards gender and sexuality. Those need to be addressed now. Things have become so bad that primitive notions regarding the female body as something that pollutes need to be thrown out. This is why I consider that the 'wall', even if it is mere tokenism, is an important first step to be taken,” she said.
Double game
Ajitha's decision to support the 'wall' is also influenced by the government's stand on women's entry into Sabarimala. “The government has stood firm in its stand. Had it wavered, just imagine the plight of our women. The regressive thinking of Namajapa protests would have taken over,” she said.
However, the very same approach has angered activists like Rekha Raj. They call it 'hypocritical'. “It is the government that stands in the way of women entry. I doubt whether they are serious about letting women into Sabarimala. The police behaviour is proof enough,” she said. “They stop women travelling to Sabarimala and crudely seek their entire history. Transgenders were allowed only after the supervisory committee gave its nod. Isn't it ironical that even the Tantri had no problems with the presence of transgenders,” she added.
Rekha Raj is also worried about the CPM's double standards. “This is a party that has not taken action against P K Sasi (a DYFI woman leader had levelled sexual harassment charges against him),” she said. Writer Sarah Joseph, too, had made the same argument while crossing over to the other side of the 'wall'.
Read more: Latest Kerala news
