I recently read an interview with actor turned politician Sanjay Dutt, in the Delhi Times. Being a tabloid-ish newspaper, the Delhi Times did not ask him about the elections he was hoping to win, or even about his acting career, they asked him about the supposed feud between his sisters and his wife. The alleged feud apparently did not exist, but Mr. Dutt felt the need to stress his version of family values.
He felt that women have one basic function. They get married, move to their new family, adopt their name and take on the responsibilities that running the family entail. He went on to say that he disapproved the new ‘fashion’ of women keeping their ‘parents’ last names after marriage, it was insulting to the man they had married and at odds with their place as the beast of domestic burden in their new ‘family’.
Alright I added the beast of burden bit, but the rest was pretty much a direct quote. It left me speechless. I was so upset on so many different levels I wasn’t quite sure how to articulate my anger. In order to make sense, I am applying GRE essay techniques to his interview.
The first issue of course is his view of the woman leaving her family behind and joining her new, true family, her in laws. Is that how defines women? A being to incorporate into a family to assume its responsibilities? Not even a General Manager, because they have some status, but a Housekeeper with benefits? As this is her only function, she obviously needs no identity separate from that of her husbands, which brings us to issue number 2, the change of the last name.
It clearly escaped the magnanimous Mr. Dutt’s notice, but his wife’s parent’s last name was also her last name. In allowing her to use his name he seems to forget that beyond being his wife or their daughter, she is herself. A person with, hopefully, a personality that has nothing to do with either of her two families. Why is it that women must sacrifice everything, down to their own identity, to be successful wives? They leave their families, they assume new duties, they have to bear and raise the children, they have to make sure that their husband’s lives are free from any trivial, irritating domestic problems. I have often heard these nameless women described as the power behind the throne, but honestly that is just such rubbish. Why must they be behind the throne? Why can’t they rule and let their husbands bring them chai and do the laundry?
A boyfriend once told people that my role in his stressful, challenging career was making sure that he got up in the morning and made it to his meetings on time. Apart from being completely untrue (for the most part I would lie in bed and watch him stagger around in the early morning light, if I bothered to wake up at all), his proudly claiming that I was a domestic Super Queen completely poleaxed me. For starters, I wasn't. And I wasn't even in training or anything, I mean I had no intention of ever being a domestic anything. I had no idea that he felt this should be his girlfriends function in his career. Worse, all the times I had utilized my intelligence to actually help him were not only forgotten, but completely irrelevant. Why is it that a woman’s worth is defined by how much easier she makes her husbands life? How well she runs her house, and how happy her husband is because of it?
Mr. Dutt’s views were traumatic. It made me realize how deeply ingrained they are in todays Indian society. And whats worse is that he will probably win the fucking election.
No comments:
Post a Comment