Why should women come to India?

Over the past few months I have spent much time posting on sexual harassment, inequality, rapes and other gender-based violence in India. This has caused me a great deal of introspection. My focus throughout most of these posts has been to educate and to caution foreign female travelers about the potential risks and offer tools they can use to protect themselves while traveling. But all the while, I have neglected a question that creeps up from time to time among female friends and colleagues from the US, but also among female companions I have met while traveling in India. Given these issues, why should women come to India in the first place?

Each female traveler who has been to India (who wishes to return) is likely to have a different answer to this. I have heard some answer based on religious or spiritual grounds: such as  “This is the home of the Dalai Lama,” “India is where Buddhism began,” or even “India is the best place to study yoga/meditation/[insert practice here].” I have heard other women respond based on a desire to do meaningful NGO work, whether it be for ecological, educational, or gender-discrimination related issues, or other volunteer-oriented enterprises. Others still, respond from a more pragmatic career-oriented practical perspective, offering reasoning such as “India has the best libraries/institutions/scholars for X field of study.”  For simplicity, I myself have often given the latter of these as the “reason” why I come. Other women may choose to downplay instances of harassment and emphasize the more adventure-based opportunities (exciting, colorful, and noisy festivals, beautiful landscapes, trekking opportunities, etc.).  Most travelers I have talked to would certainly highlight affordability (compared to 1st-world standards) as important for the choice of India.  And many women would probably cite more than one of the above reasons as important for their decision to come to (or return to) India. Many women travelers (whether intentional or not) may travel in groups or with a male companion and thus avoid the bulk of harassment issues, but for the purposes of this article I focus on the experiences of lone female travelers.

All of these above reasons to coming to India have in common one common assumption: the good (the potential benefits gained by visiting Indian) outweighs the bad (harassment, etc.). In other words, harassment and discrimination can be ignored because the opportunities India has to offer outweigh the risks. In other words, experiences of harassment and discrimination are necessarily minimized by female travelers in order to support and justify their reasons for coming/returning. My first post in this blog began with such an instance—a female traveler from Belgium who nearly succeeded in completely blocking out from her memory a recent disturbing experience of sexual harassment and gave a narrative describing India as a place where “harassment isn’t really  a big deal.” I have likewise met numerous female scholars and students who told me that harassment is simply a part of being female in India, a "rite of passage” that foreign women have to experience before eventually feeling ‘comfortable’ in India. Several among these women conveyed to me a certain amount of pride for successfully enduring these experiences. In other words, if you are a female and want to come (let alone return) to India for work/studies, the ability to endure harassment is almost considered a prerequisite; female scholars should toughen up and not let pesky things like harassment bother them. These views function as a sort of defense mechanism, allowing women to temporarily tolerate the experience of harassment in order to do what they came to India to do. But like all defense mechanisms, they are temporary solutions at best and unhealthy in the long-run. In her book Stop Street Harassment: Making Public Places Safe and Welcoming for Women (Santa Barbara, California: Praeger, 2010),  Holly Kearl devotes several chapters to discussing the context in which harassment occurs (fear of rape, gender inequality, and it's combination with other forms of discrimination) as having a significant impact on how street harassment impacts women.  For anyone inclined to minimize their own or anyone else’s experience of street harassment as “no big deal” and/or something not worth being concerned about, I highly recommend in particular Chapters two and three from this book.

The demerits of these kinds of dismissive attitudes are evident. Dismissing harassment as something which women “should” get used to is demeaning. Studies of harassment around the world  (I refer you to Holly Kearls’ book among many others) show that the long-term effects of harassment do not necessarily stem from individual isolated instances of harassment, but from the repetitive and pervasive nature of these experiences and from the fact that harassment occurs in the context of both gender inequality and a pervasive fear of rape. I hope that my personal experience of street harassment can be instructive in this way. Whenever I would initially return to India, I would have a honeymoon phase where everyone seems friendly and even the actions of harassers seem meaningless and trivial. But as the weeks (or sometimes merely days) pass, I would start to feel the impact more and more. I started making small choices designed to minimize harassment, such as limiting how often I would walk alone in public. I found riding a bike to in Sarnath freeing, not as much because of the speed or the exercise (which were both exhilarating), but because it was much more difficult for men to harass you while they also are trying to keep their balance and avoid collisions on a bike! The few attempts to do so resulted in embarrassing near-collisions (on their part—not mine!), which I took to be adequate punishment for attempted harassment. I found myself gradually choosing to avoid walking around in public places and felt relief whenever I realized I did not need to leave the guest house on a given day. From conversations with other women, I know that I was not alone in choosing to react this way. One white foreign woman I know admitted that she grew so tired of harassment that eventually she gave up on going out in public without her husband or family with her. Simply stated, harassment impacts women greatly in the long-run and it is neither practical nor necessarily healthy to minimize experiences of street harassment. So if ignoring or ‘toughening up’ is not necessarily a practical solution then how can we encourage women who travel to come to India?

One female traveler from Germany recently told  me (regarding harassment) “I love India, but I don’t always like Indians.” I have heard this type of response numerous times from female travelers and it is a perspective that at times of great frustration I too have felt affinity for. But embedded in this statement there two fallacious assumptions regarding harassment in India which need to be addressed.

Fallacy # 1 – a large percentage of men in India will harass women.
Actually, in my experience the percentage is quite small. There is undoubtedly a larger percentage of men (left un-addressed here) who may in fact side with victim-blaming attitudes, but among those, very few will openly harass women in public. When I enter a subway train in Delhi, although covered modestly in local clothing, I feel tension from the perception of unwanted stares and glares. But when I look at the percentage of men in a given subway car packed with 70-80 people, maybe only two or three are openly looking at me, and out of those 2-3, if confronted (by me) for their behavior, only one may remain unembarrassed and unapologetic. We are looking at a percentage of men (among Delhi male subway riders) of perhaps under 2%. In Sarnath also, while I was harassed several times daily on the way to and from the university, while 4-5 boys or men may have been the cause, I passed (or was passed by) several hundred more along the way who left me alone. Why then does it seem like a much larger number than it is? One is of course perception. When you become aware of harassment, you feel self-conscious, which increases the intensity of the experience. When harassment becomes a repeated experience, that self-consciousness increases and everyone becomes a potential harasser. At least twice while in Sarnath, I initially ignored people who approached me because I was anticipating harassment. In the first case, it was a kind man who had noticed my headphones had fallen out of my pocket and were dragging on the ground. The second time was actually another foreigner who was asking directions. Both times, I felt embarrassment at having prejudged them (incorrectly). But the point is, I initially ignored them because I had found that to be the safest way to avoid or minimize interactions with harassers—in other words the percentage of harassers felt sufficiently high to warrant antisocial or even rude behavior. The numbers always feel higher than they are.   The other reason is the population of India. Since street harassment is highly understudied, it is difficult to obtain statistics of percentages of men who admit to harassing women, but even if we take a percentage as low as 1% of the male population of India to be harassers, in a country of 628.8 million males (see 2012 census), 1% amounts to 6.28 million persons, which while a small percentage is still a large number of people, especially in larger cities. If we suppose a higher percentage, such as 10%, the number of harassers is of course astounding (62.8 million). While in 2012, reports indicate 78% of women in Delhi were harassed in 2012 (see this report), I would argue that it is unlikely this harassment was conducted by a majority of Delhi’s male residents. Simply put, India has a huge population, so even if a percentage as small as 1% or as large as 10% of men will harass you, it feels like a large percentage because it is a large number of people. Should a country be abandoned because a small minority of men harass women? Certainly these percentages of people engaging in bigotry and mistreatment of others can be found in any western country, the US included. If we consider discrimination and bullying levied at lesbian, gay, bi, or transgender people, Muslims (or even those simply ‘appearing’ Muslim or Arab), people with mental illness, and many other groups, the US doesn’t come out looking so good. For instance, some recent statistics on the bullying of gays in schools indicate that “about 9 out of 10 LGBT teens have reported being bullied at school within the past year because of their sexual orientation. Out of those numbers, almost half have reported being physically harassed followed by another quarter who reported actually being physically assaulted” (see this article). Reports indicate that in the workplace also, 90% of gays received some form of harassment or discrimination on the job in 2011. (see this report ).  But does this mean that gays, Muslims, and other targeted groups should avoid the US out of fear of discrimination or ill-treatment?  If we take the part (male harassers in India) to represent the whole (male population of India) we succumb to the informal fallacy known as “fallacy of composition.” Likewise, if we take the fact that some Indian men harass women to indicate that Indian men in general are horrible people, we commit the logical mistake known as “ecological fallacy.”

Fallacy #2 – Harassment is simply an accepted part of Indian culture
Next is the assumption that India and it’s residents (male included) want India to remain this way. Anyone who paid attention to International news in December and January will have noted that countless Indians across the country rallied for weeks, protesting the Delhi gang rape, and clamoring for greater enforcement of (and revision of rules) concerning sexual harassment and sexual assault.  The citizens care. That much is certain. While there are plenty of people in power (including religious clergy and politicians) granted air-time and/or print-space in media who espouse victim-blaming attitudes, recent protests and recent handling of these types of statements in media has shown that these views are controversial and no longer necessarily the majority view. Even before this incident, in numerous cities there have been women’s right’s organizations and other NGOs working to combat street harassment and sexual assault (Safe Delhi, Blank Noise, among others come to mind). Several of these NGOs exist to educate the public and to give women tools to combat discrimination, harassment and even sexual assault. In Delhi, there are women-only train cars for subways and there is a move to create women-only taxis as well. I have recently served as a coordinator between Thousand Waves’s Violence Prevention program  in Chicago, IL  and Seido Karate Noida’s  Violence Prevention and outreach programs in Noida and other parts of Delhi. Programs like this exist in India just as they do in the US and are growing. So why haven’t these reform movements ‘fixed’ the problem? There are numerous challenges that make reform difficult.  India is a vastly diverse place. Over 75% of the population still live in villages, rather than cities, and have less access to TV, computers, and other media which enable reform movements to impact a society quickly. Secondly, India is still very much a region-based country. I have often commented that going to a different state India feels like going to a new country. With various regions and regional identities competing for power, any country-wide change will be slow. However if we take the slowness to be an indicator that people do not want change, we dis-empower those individuals who are working hard to create the change us foreigners speak of. By misrepresenting and mis-characterizing India as a whole in this way, we fall into the fallacy of the “Straw Man” argument.

But perhaps those two counter-arguments are insufficient. A female traveler could argue that even given all this, if a woman knows her experience in India may be uncomfortable and she is almost guaranteed to face harassment of some sort, then why should she go to India? Why not another place? Why is India worth the risk?

For this, I only offer my own anecdotal response. Other women will doubtlessly have different answers. But mine is this: While some may choose to avoid India because of the people, for me, the best reason to come to India is because of the people. The relationships I have formed with individuals and families here in India alone to me makes it worth it. When I returned to India this trip (Sept 2012) and realized I was bringing as many gifts for friends here in India as I imagined I’d be bringing back to the US, I had the realization that India too has become my home, and I have “family” here as well. In all these cases, my family was 'earned' without a male companion. I have never been mistreated or discriminated against in any way by these people on the basis of my gender, nor do I believe I ever will be. For me, travel is always about the people—learning about the language and the culture through interacting with people. The amount of hospitality, kindness and generosity that I have experienced in India far exceeds the amount of harassment, and mistreatment I have experienced. For me, I would in fact argue that the good outweighs the bad—statistically and otherwise. But for me this is not about minimizing the experience of harassment, it is about accepting that there is a problem and having open, honest discussions about these issues with other people (domestic and foreign) in order to create change. I also choose to work in other ways towards change by coordinating with local violence prevention programs and by teaching individual women skills along the way. I choose to have discussions with other foreign tourists to provide the space for them to share and process their experiences. And I choose to write publicly  to share the experiences of myself and others, to give victims a voice and a safe space to process. 

What are your thoughts on this issue?

Recent narratives on rape in India: responses to the Delhi Gang rape

Originally the purpose of this blog was to provide resources for female travelers who visit (or want to visit) countries like India which are known for street harassment problems and create a space for them to discuss issues and share their experiences. Until recently, my posts have been tailored rather specifically to that aim and thus have talked most about ‘videsi’ (foreigner) issues and have rarely addressed the issue  of street harassment or rape of Indian women. Given the events of the past few weeks, as a (junior) scholar and activist dedicated to women’s rights causes, I feel this blog now must expand to serve a larger purpose—to educate others on the more general situation regarding all women in India, desi (local) and videsi. 

Over the past 2-3 months since I arrived in India late September, I have noticed a steady rise in the reports of rape in India. For a couple weeks in October, the local news headlines centered on a series of unrelated rapes in West Bengal and on Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee’s response to these rapes (and her response to media coverage of the rapes). It was clear to me at that time that in India people are still very divided regarding how they attribute blame in the event of rape. There are currently at least two competing narratives used to speak about rape in India. One narrative is advocated by activists and women’s rights groups such as Blank Noise and Safe Delhi which seek to educate men and women on issues of sexual harassment (‘eve-teasing’ as it is usually called in English-language Indian media) and the harm it does to women. Not unlike violence prevention programs found in Europe and the US, the narrative promoted by these groups places the burden of responsibility for harassment (and rape) on men. The different ways in which sexual harassment manifests in India is enumerated. Statistical information is offered, demonstrating how women are harassed or molested in clothing ranging from full ‘desi’ (salwar-kamize with dupatta, burka, saree, etc.) to ‘Western’-style clothing (jeans, skirt, etc.) and are harassed or molested at all times of day or night. This evidence serves as counter-evidence to the opposing narrative (which I discussed more fully in my post on Chief Minister Banerjee) which asserts that if a woman is harassed or raped, she must have done something ‘wrong.’  This narrative is promoted in ways ranging from the subtle to overt. More subtle promotions include the persistent habit of news reports describing exactly what the female victim was wearing at the time, whether she was out late at night and whether or not she was drinking. More overt promotions can be found in  statements openly condemning the actions of a victim immediately prior to her attack. Discussing a molestation one blogger for the Times of India reported the following conversation while on a Delhi-bound train from Assam:

As the train’s attendants came with a fresh supply of bottled mineral water, the conversation turned to the Guwahati molestation case of July 9 this year when 15 men were caught on TV pouncing on a teenaged girl outside a bar as one of the goons whipped out his camera to record it for titillation and posterity.

“But what was the girl doing so late in the night?” asked the Air Force officer in the traveling group. From Ghaziabad but working in Guwahati, he went on, “Apparently she was drunk and was flirting with some men in the pub. Shouldn’t she be probed for loose character?” Some heads had already begun to nod in agreement when another passenger, by now red with rage, said, “Next time someone grabs your sister’s bottom, the police should first investigate whether she’s morally sound.” No one spoke to each other the rest of the journey as the sullen group waited impatiently to disembark at New Delhi.

These types of victim-blaming response are far from rare in India. I have already written on Chief Minister Banerjee’s recent remarks of a similar nature regarding the rise of rapes (and media coverage of the rapes) in West Bengal in October 2012.  The essence of this narrative is clear. Women who behave properly (do not smoke or drink or go out at night) and who dress properly (modest Indian clothing rather than ‘Western’ clothing) will not be harassed or raped. If a women is raped, it is because either she violated one or more of those moral codes or (in the absence of such evidence) or is asserted the victim had a “relationship” with the attacker or one of the attackers and is therefore at fault. In April 2012 Lakshmi Chaudhry wrote this article summarizing a series of interviews of Delhi police regarding their views and responses to rape. It is interesting to note that the exposé upon which this article was based, which was publically available online as recent as October 18, 2012 has since been removed and did not seem to be available in the news archives.  These victim-blaming narratives are certainly not limited to India. June 28, 2010 this anti-victim-blaming TV advert was aired in Scotland in response to a government study conducted in February 2010 reported a surprising percentage of Scottish people attribute at least partial blame to a female victims of rape if she was either drinking, wearing revealing clothing, flirting or  “known to have had many sexual partners.”

The past few weeks have witnessed a colossal upheaval  among the Indian people over the horrifically violent rape of a 23-year old female physiotherapy student in Delhi. The two competing narratives have now come to the forefront of media attention in India.  The general outline of the crime is as follows. The 23-year old girl and her male friend had gone to see a movie which let out 8:30pm. By 9 or so they were waiting for a public bus to head home. A group of six boys including one minor had been drinking and decided to go “joyriding.” They rented out a private bus, and drove around South Delhi, posing as a Delhi public bus. The minor posed as a fare collector and invited the couple on the bus. Thinking it to be a public bus, the couple boarded the bus and within five minutes the couple was harassed, the women subsequently taken to the back of the bus  to be raped repeatedly and viciously beaten. Her male companion who had tried to defend her was also severely beaten. The two were stripped naked and dumped outside and found not too long later and rushed to the emergency room. Based on statements from the male friend, the bus was identified and the majority of the attackers were rounded up and arrested within the same night. The victim recovered temporarily a few days later, but remained in intensive care and underwent several surgeries. Her health has wavered between stable and critical since. As of late night December 26, she was rushed on a plane to Singapore for emergency surgery for internal bleeding. 

This crime, known in Indian newspapers the “Delhi gang rape” has stirred a nation to response. Within three days of the rape, protests began at India gate (New Delhi) demanding “justice” in the form of hangings for the rapists. The protests turned violent as scuffles between angry protestors and police began. Policemen fired water cannons at the protesters and several protestors were injured. One police died during the protests, apparently due to a heart attack, although investigations are still underway. Two days ago a new “women’s helpline” emergency number (“181”) has been created in Delhi in response to the gang rape and recent protests. Police have cleared protestors away from India Gate at least twice and closed several metro stations nearby to prevent others from joining the protests. Protests have spanned India from various states in the south up through Himachal Pradesh. The demands of protestors does not appear to be unified, but what is clear is that the protestors are dissatisfied with the way the Indian government has handled issues of women’s safety and treated previous cases of rape and are demanding “justice.” Safety of women in  Delhi, which even prior to this case (as of June 2012 according to a Times of India article) was known as India’s “rape capital” has been of great concern over the past few years. The creation of women-only subway and train cars has been argued to be insufficient. In Delhi, the protests center around issue of safety for women and the The public is clamoring for change. Many protestors carry signs arguing that the rapists should be given the death sentence (such as “Rapists should be hanged”). Other protestors sport signs indicating their concern for social change (“Real Men Don’t Rape”).  The argument made in support of the death sentence is that if the attackers are sentenced to death, this will serve as a deterrent for future rapists.   In response to reports that the victim “fearlessly” remained “fearless”  and “composed” while reporting the event to police and officials when she first regained consciousness, The TOI (The Times of India) gave the victim the pseudonym ‘Nirbhaya’ (Hindi for ‘fearless’) and has continued to use that name as a place-holder for the victim in all news reporting, evidencing an obvious bias in favor of the victim. In this article the TOI describes the victim as follows,

But Nirbhaya, as TOI has named the 23-year-old, survived. Ten days on since the gang rape on December 16, she remains alive, even if precariously, but not as a vegetable on a hospital bed. The assault wrecked her body but has left her spirit tightly coiled. Her survival so far has depended on emergency operations, blood transfusions and ventilator support, but in her wakeful moments — even when dosed with morphine — Nirbhaya has never lacked clarity of mind, or a sense of purpose.

In her statement before an SDM last Friday, Nirbhaya reportedly gave a precise and detailed account of the assault which DCP (south) Chhaya Sharma described as "fearless and bold". Although police wanted her to respond with signs to a questionnaire, so as to not stress her out, she insisted on giving the details. 

Doctors attending to her say she is fired by a resolve to bring the six men to book. Early last week, when she was not allowed to speak, Nirbhaya scribbled a note for her family: "Mujhe bacha lo, mein jeena chahti hoon (save me, I want to live)". The same evening her entire intestine was removed as it had turned gangrenous. 

When she regained consciousness next morning, Thursday, Nirbhaya worried about her lost ATM cards and alerted her family to block them. "We have never seen such injuries, especially in a sexual assault case, (yet) she has immense fighting spirit," remarked Dr BD Athani, medical superintendent of Safdarjung Hospital, where she is admitted.

The tone of this newspaper article, which reads more like a travelogue, clearly evidences the sympathetic response predominantly conveyed in media. However, does sympathy towards the victim and desire for “justice” indicate a changing attitude towards rape victims and a reversal of previous victim-blaming narratives? It seems rather to be the case that public narratives addressing the issue of blame continue to be bifurcated. 
In an article discussing a group of schoolchildren’s responses to the Delhi gang rape case, a TOI correspondent writes,

A group of youngsters gathered to discuss sexual violence against women think hanging is too good for rapists. "Tarpana chahiye (they should suffer)," says a teenage girl. They may be children but their experiences are 'adult' ones - they've been harassed aboard public transport, molested in markets, been whistled at and felt up. They blame "mentality" for all of it…. 

...One teenaged boy made himself very unpopular by suggesting Sunday's incident wasn't entirely the men's fault. "She had also gone out to watch a movie and didn't tell her parents," he'd said and was instantly shouted down by the others. Most of the other boys felt girls should be allowed the freedom to go where they please. "Would it have changed anything if she had informed her parents? Or if she had taken the bus on the way back from work and not from a movie?" asked the rest.

This article seems to indicate that among this group of children addressed, victim-blaming responses are far from the norm. However, more critical responses include those of Andhra Pradesh Congress chief Botsa Satyanarayana who is reported to have argued December 24th,

"Just because India achieved freedom at midnight does not mean that women can venture out after dark. They should ensure that they do not board buses with few passengers," Botsa said to the shock of reporters at a press conference at Congress headquarters here.

Botsa's comment came in context of growing protests against the gang-rape and violence against women in general. He then tried to cover up for his remark by praising Sonia. "Although it (Delhi gang-rape) was a minor incident, Soniaji made it a point to meet the protesters when they called on her," Botsa said. 

There was no stopping Botsa as he continued, "The woman should have thought twice before boarding the suspicious private bus that night. Though the incident was condemnable, she should also have behaved keeping in mind the situation."

What is clear so far that there has been a raising of public consciousness regarding issues of rape and harassment in India. Competing narratives for who ultimately is to blame continue to persist openly, however the predominant narrative of victim-blaming is being debated openly, perhaps for the first time in India. Since news regarding ‘Nirbhaya’ continues to dominate the front pages of Indian newspapers and lagre-scale protests continue as of today, it is likely that the coming weeks will see further changes in the narratives surrounding victims of rape. I will do my best to update with a new post when that time comes. 

Understanding responses to rapes in West Bengal

In my previous post  I encouraged female travelers to learn about the culture of the place they are visiting to better prepare themselves. This article is an attempt to provide greater understanding of sexual harassment and sexual assault in India through an analysis of the responses by media and political leaders to a series of rapes occurring recently in West Bengal (India). I hope that this piece will bring a greater understanding of the challenges and complexities of gender relations and the difficulties in reporting sexual assault in India.

I have been recently following the series of rapes in West Bengal that have appeared in the news. As more and more women and young girls report rape, the media attention continues to spotlight these events, which seems to have made West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee quite uncomfortable. In response to the rise of media attention to rapes in the area Banerjee—a woman— on national television accuses media of “glorifying rape” in order to get more press coverage and makes a series of comments strongly implying that what she calls “modern permissive society” in India (things such as holding hands in public) are the cause of rape in the first place. Here are several different records of her response in prominent Indian newspapers: In the first one I read, which was both in the print and online version of the Times of India contains the following account:

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee took a dig at the modern permissive society, but stopped short of linking it to rise in crimes against women in the state. 

"Earlier, if men and women held hands, parents would reprimand them. Now everything is done openly. It's like an open market with open options," said Mamata.

She accused the media of "news pollution" against her government and trying to project Bengal as a land of rapists. "Rape is sought to be glorified by these people. This will not be tolerated by people. Negative journalism only destroys and it is time to champion positive journalism," she said at a programme to release the festival number of the Trinamool Congress mouthpiece Jago Bangla in Kolkata. Besides party leaders, pro-Trinamool intellectuals and Tollywood actors were present there.
"Wrong news items and canards are being circulated by a section of the media, particularly some news channels, to target the government. They are even distorting my version," Mamata said.

The Hindustan Times similarly reported:

The chief minister alleged that these media were suppressing facts and thus causing "news pollution", pointing to projection of some rape incidents in the state.
"Everyday rape incidents are being highlighted as if the entire state has become the land of rapists. Rape is sought to be glorified by these people. This will not be tolerated by people. I would like to say that negative journalism only destroys and it is time to champion positive journalism," she said.

First let’s get the facts straight. The facts are there has been a significant rise in the reports of rapes in the West Bengal area over the past few weeks. To see details of some of these I encourage you to read here and here.  The news media has been paying attention to this. In Chief Minister Banerjee’s view, this media attention is a bad thing because it brings unwanted negative attention to the region, which is what she refers to as “glorifying rape.” It is perhaps even accurate to say that the media attention paid to West Bengal recently has focused on West Bengal itself and questioned why the rapes are there rather than directly addressing potential causes for increase in rape in the area. But the words the Chief Minister Monday night carry much more than a reproach for media attention to her state. Her words imply that rape should not be covered by media, and that attention paid by media to rape is unwarranted. This I think is a huge problem.  While news media often tends towards the sensational, that does not negate the importance of reporting these events. Rape and sexual assault in India is severely under-reported in India, in part because of the lack of support for women (and men) survivors. The attitudes of police officers, even in major cities such as Delhi may also be a contributing factor, if this report based on this exposé  is to be believed. While I cannot verify the facts, judging by the way 'modern' Indian women are depicted in even the English-language print media, I think the attitudes depicted in those articles are likely accurate enough.

Despite advances in women's access to education and the (reluctant) acceptance of women in the workplace in the larger cities, Indian women who dress 'western' are often treated with the same disrespect given to white female travelers who dress 'western.'  Women who engage in behaviors that are considered 'inappropriate' for women, such as smoking or drinking, are also assumed to be engaging in similarly 'inappropriate' sexual behavior. When these women are sexually harassed or even assaulted, the media response is usually to blame the victim. The male perpetrator is culturally left off the hook by the adage "Boys will be boys." In colleges, girls dorms will often have an earlier curfew than boys dorms, "for their own protection" and boys are often prohibited (with harsh restrictions) from visiting female dorms. These restrictions further reinforce the the cultural assumption that boys can't control their impulses and can't be trusted. The responsibility is passed on to the female who must "protect" themselves as society dictates with 'appropriate' clothing and behavior. Suffice it to say that rape and sexual assault, let alone sexual harassment are major problems throughout India that have not been sufficiently reported, let alone addressed. With greater public awareness comes greater political pressure to change laws and law enforcement regarding these crimes, which are important steps towards reducing the incidents of rape.

What I find most problematic about Chief Minister Banerjee’s statements is the victim-blaming. Recall her statement, “Earlier, if men and women held hands, parents would reprimand them. Now everything is done openly. It's like an open market with open options." For those less aware of Indian cultural norms, I should explain that in India, public displays of affection such as hand-holding, let alone kissing or more intimate  displays are considered inappropriate. Simply put, affection is only considered appropriate between husband and wife and only in the privacy of their own bedroom.  Nowadays, hand-holding (and occasionally embracing) between couples can be seen in public parks (and occasionally in dark booths in local restaurants), but this is largely considered inappropriate behavior by Indian society.  Pre-marital dating and PDA in India is much too complex an issue to do justice here, but suffice it to say, it is a controversial topic.

What I think is important to state is that Chief Minister Banerjee’s statements clearly imply that this “modern permissive society” 's allowance of things such as dating and hand-holding are indirect causes for the apparent rise in sexual assault. These statements remove the responsibility from the perpetrator and places it on those participating in this “modern permissive society,” thus implying that any woman who ‘participates’ in those types of actions deserves to be raped. These kinds of statements, spoken by a public government official carry weight and are significant  But Chief Minister Banerjee is not simply any public official.  She is the first female elected to her position and has become a public figure, well-known in many circles for her work in reforming health and education in West Bengal, among other things. In 2012 (a year after assuming office), Time Magazine named her one of the “100 Most Influential People in the World.” For someone of her status to be publicly making such statements is truly shocking. 

While this issue pertains specifically to the rape of Indian women in West Bengal, I think it is helpful for female travelers to understand some of the complexities and tensions regarding these issues.  It is important to note that India is changing. While India is quickly developing and is increasingly becoming more modernized in terms of infrastructure, changes in social norms have not necessarily paced the developments in infrastructure. Along with the rise of women in higher education and in the workplace, especially in bigger cities, there is perhaps an increased resistance to this very fact. From research on rape and violence prevention, we know that sexual harassment and sexual assault is never about ‘sex’, it is about issues of power and/or anger.  With all changing power structures in India, tension, resulting in resistance to and anger towards  these kinds of change are at an all-time high. Foreign women may symbolize perhaps a even greater disparity in power for a variety of reasons, which is one aspect  (of the many) I neglected to address in my previous post on "Sexual harassment of white Women in India". Perhaps these issues warrant further reflection.