A response to RoseChasm’s CNN iReport

I have been reluctant to post on this topic, but given the enormous volume of chatter online about this article and given that the author is a college student from my home institution,* I feel ethically obliged to give some kind of response. For those who have not yet read it, I advise everyone read the following CNN iReport “India: The Story You Never Wanted to Hear,”written by a University of Chicago undergrad writing under the pseudonym RoseChasm. The author’s real name is now public knowledge due to the The recent CNN article covering the worldwide responses to RoseChasm’s piece, however to preserve her ‘privacy’ I choose to refer to her by the handle she used for the iReport.  Before you read further into this response, I encourage everyone to click on the link above and either read or re-read RoseChasm’s report.

RoseChasm was one in a group of college students that went to India for a 3-month trip, mostly unsupervised, but (as I understand it) somewhat organized by faculty the University of Chicago.  As she reports, throughout her trip she was regularly harassed in public, violated on numerous occasions, and survived two attempted sexual assaults in a 48-hour period. At least one other girl in her group was also the victim of an attempted sexual assault. After returning to Chicago, she started experiencing anxiety, depression, etc. and sought psychological help. She was eventually diagnosed with PTSD and is now on a temporary medical leave of absence from the University. This much is uncontroversial and documented in her iReport.

What is apparently controversial is the way she tells her story. RoseChasm frames her experiences in a way which forms a personal testimonial about the violence she suffered. There is no attempt to make arguments for how India can change, there is no attempt to nuance why or how this violence occurred, and there is no attempt to distinguish between Indian men who enact this violence and Indian men who are respectful of women. In short, her piece is not a scholarly attempt to describe a phenomena. It is a testimonial, written from the perspective of a traumatized college student, sharing her story in an attempt  to bring greater public awareness. 

RoseChasm opens her report with the following:

When people ask me about my experience studying abroad in India, I always face the same dilemma. How does one convey the contradiction that over the past few months has torn my life apart, and convey it in a single succinct sentence? 

“India was wonderful," I go with, "but extremely dangerous for women.” Part of me dreads the follow-up questions, and part of me hopes for more. I'm torn between believing in the efficacy of truth, and being wary of how much truth people want.
 
Because, how do I describe my three months in the University of Chicago Indian civilizations program when it was half dream, half nightmare? Which half do I give
 
Do I tell them about our first night in the city of Pune, when we danced in the Ganesha festival, and leave it at that? Or do I go on and tell them how the festival actually stopped when the American women started dancing, so that we looked around to see a circle of men filming our every move?
 
Do I tell them about bargaining at the bazaar for beautiful saris costing a few dollars a piece, and not mention the men who stood watching us, who would push by us, clawing at our breasts and groins?
 
When people compliment me on my Indian sandals, do I talk about the man who stalked me for forty-five minutes after I purchased them, until I yelled in his face in a busy crowd? 

Do I describe the lovely hotel in Goa when my strongest memory of it was lying hunched in a fetal position, holding a pair of scissors with the door bolted shut, while the staff member of the hotel who had tried to rape my roommate called me over and over, and breathing into the phone?   

These events that she details in her report form a cohesive narrative about her travel experiences. While RoseChasm had many pleasant and positive experiences, the memories of (at least some of these) is tainted by the traumatic experiences that followed. She reports the tension she faced when friends and family asked her about her travels. This is a tension I think many of us who travel face, though perhaps to lesser degrees. For me, travel more generally is a complex series of experiences, not all of which are positive.  If your experiences include intense forms of harassment or other potentially traumatic events, the complexities are even greater.  It can be challenging enough simply to process the complexities of travel experiences, let alone create narratives to be consumed by friends and family. Yet when I return from travel (to the US), I find I am bombarded by people seemingly wanting to live vicariously through me, wanting to experience all the joys of my travel (but none of the sorrows) and so it appears I have little choice. Everyone expects an exciting, happy story. But what happens when, like RoseChasm, you don’t have one to sell? This in part, is what to me is compelling about RoseChasm’s piece. It reminds us of the burden of responsibility we often place on travelers to come back and report happy travel stories.  
 
If we treat RoseChasm’s piece as a scholarly assessment of fact, it is of course hugely problematic. The framing device RoseChasm uses necessitates her identify discrete positive experiences which were in some way tainted by the more traumatic experiences.  Criticism has been levied by some, arguing that the particular positive experiences RoseChasm identifies depict an India that is an Orientalist consumerist paradise: an exotic place full of opportunities for cheap shopping and exciting activities such as public dancing at religious festivals, etc. This paradise is then contrasted with RoseChasm’s traumatic experiences of violence which then depict an alternate India as savage and violent. In this narrative, there is seemingly no middle ground for an ordinary (non-paradise) existence in India or for an Indian voice (male or female) to arise. Perhaps for some (under-educated) readers of this CNN report might conclude that India is a horrible violent place and no one should visit. The recent CNN article covering the worldwide responses to RoseChasm’s piece certainly thinks this an issue.
 
A female student from the same program wrote an iReport in response to RoseChasm titled “Same India—Different Story” under the pseudonym twoseat criticizing RoseChasms’s failure to include an Indian (or other minority) voice. Twoseat reports:

As the only black woman (and individual in general) on the trip, I can definitely say that I had a very unique experience in my program. Men stared at me in India. Women stared at me. Children and teenagers stared at me. All the time. I wanted to become invisible in the crowd. I felt that I stood out even more because I stood out very starkly from the Indian population and especially from my white and Asian peers. I was also targeted with harassment, and I felt violated many times on the trip. However, in my experiences in India, I have met a solid handful of warm and honest Indian men- men who are also college students, men who also love the thrill of riding on a motorcycle in the busy streets, men who defended me at necessary times, and men who took the time to get to know me and my culture. And that should not at all be surprising.
…
So why should all Indian men be subjected to judgment for the rapes that some men have committed? RoseChasm does not address the fact that there are warm and honest men in India. When we do not make the distinction that only some men of a population commit a crime, we develop a stereotype for an entire population. And when we develop a negative stereotype for a population, what arises? Racism.

Twoseat makes a very valid point. RoseChasm’s account does appear to generalize Indian men and fails to address the fact that this violence will have been enacted only by a certain small percentage of Indian men. Regarding RoseChasm’s report, twoseat says:

I believe that [she] had every right to tell her story, but I wanted to alleviate the burden that it put on many Indians and other people in general. I had no intention of lessening the significance of her experience. I just wanted to highlight the dangers in writing such a one-sided piece on a population.

An Indian woman from Bangalore named Meera Vijayan also responds to RoseChasm under in an iReport titled “India: a Different View.” If you visit her profile page you’ll see Meera has written iReports on various topics relating to gender-based violence in India. Meera tells the CNN reporter:

I was inspired to respond because I am an Indian girl who has faced similar experiences that Michaela Cross describes on her ireport. Sexual harassment is common in India. And this can be frightening and traumatic for anyone who travels here. The air of hopelessness for women here is frustrating and I wish that things change. However, I know that although I have faced sexual harassment, there is a side to India that one can truly enjoy and appreciate. And given the heavy air of cynicism about the Indian mindset (which truly is deeply chauvinist), I wanted to point out, on a positive note, that one can also have a beautiful experience here.

Meera opens her iReport with the following statement:

I wanted to post this in response to the video of ireporter Michaela Cross's account of what the situation is like in India. First of all, I wanted to express my deepest regret for what she faced. As a girl, who lives here in India, and who has faced several similar experiences I wanted to take this moment to tell you all - yes, this is a side of India that is a reality to most young women who reside here or for that matter travel here.

Meera then expresses her concern that foreigners such as RoseChasm may judge India (and Indians) in an unfairly harsh way for the harassment experiences they endure and encourages foreigners to open up more while traveling:   

One, as a foreigner, be it a man or a woman, I know that it's an extremely different cultural environment here in India. And sometimes, unless you are in a city, it is common to be stared at. It is definitely not uncommon for people to express an interest to how foreigners dress or behave in public. This can be incredibly uncomfortable, but often times, the tension can be easily broken by merely ignoring this unless you truly sense physical danger. Sometimes not understanding the complexities of Indian life can make you judge its people rather harshly.

Second, I definitely would really advise female travelers to practice caution when making decisions such as travelling alone at night or being anywhere where you aren't quite sure about. It is a fact that it isn't safe. I have been stalked before and groped as well, and these experiences can be frightening and traumatic. But that said, this shouldn't stop you from living your life and exploring India. While India can largely be unsafe, you cannot stereotype a whole nation. Remember, people will always be alien to you if you wish to see them as alien to your life. Once you open up, it is often a very different experience. You will form stronger bonds, understand the situation better and have a positive experience while here. Yes, I find it infuriating that women have so much to fear but then women also have so much to look forward to. And we shouldn't forget that. I think I will leave it here saying - Yes, there are many things wrong about India, but then there is a lot of good too. And that's true of every country, isn't it?

While encouraging American travelers to open up while traveling is generally something I would agree with (I think as a nation we tend to spend too much time when traveling connecting with other foreigners rather than connecting with locals!), I’m not certain how Meera’s advice would help someone like RoseChasm, whose experience of harassment in India far exceeded a mere “interest to how foreigners dress or behave in public.” Is public masturbation now an accepted form of expressing curious interest in foreigners? I assume of course that Meera’a target audience is not RoseChasm, but rather future travelers to India who might be reading articles addressing violence against women in India. One thing I greatly appreciate about Meera’s response is the fact that while encouraging foreign travelers to remain open, and look for safe ways to travel to and and enjoy India, she does not try to defend Indian men, nor does she in any was try to lessen RoseChasm’s experience.
 
However other respondent’s comments are much less supportive. Polly Hwang, a Korean-American female who has traveled to India over the past 5 years with her Indian boyfriend, wrote an iReport in response titled “People who Generalize are Evil: My Response to Michaela Cross's Experiences in India.” As you may guess from the title, this iReport is far from a scholarly critique of perceived one-sidedness of RoseChasm’s report. Rather it reads like a polemic, blaming Michaela (RoseChasm) for all of her traumatic experiences. My favorite paragraph is the following:
 

Why was I not sexually harassed? It could be that I was just plain lucky. It could also be the fact that I took a lot of precautions to avoid dangerous areas, wear appropriate clothing, behave appropriately etc. Not to chastise Rose Chasm in anyway but she should not have been dancing in the Ganesha street festival known for its hordes of extremely drunk young men. She should not have stayed in cheap shady hostels in Goa which I'm sure had no positive online reviews. She should not be flipping fingers at locals and most importantly, she should have left after her first incident of sexual harassment, instead of staying for over 90 days and developing PTSD. I'm not victim shaming in any way, the pigs who tormented Rose Chasm take 100% of the blame. However as foreigners, it's our responsibility to be aware of how to behave and live in the local culture.

 
Well Polly, if you are not intending to engage in victim-blaming, you might want to reconsider attributing all the harassment and ill-treatment RoseChasm experienced to the apparent “choices” she made in India (public dancing, choice of hotel, etc.).  As foreigners it is certainly our responsibility to “be aware of how to behave and live in the local culture.” But that does not mean that if we experience violence (as harassment and attempted sexual assault are), that this too is our responsibility. The unfortunate truth is there is no method or strategy  that can guarantee freedom from harassment. There is no way to 100% prevent the possibility of sexual assault. Individual choices we make in life may impact the risk of encountering some form of violence, certainly. But that does not mean that if we do experience violence, the violence is our responsibility as well. The responsibility and fault always lies with the attacker. Anything else is victim-blaming. Even if we do everything in our power to reduce risk, there is no guarantee of safety anywhere in the world, let alone India. Would you have foreigners hide themselves in expensive (rather than “seedy”) luxurious hotels apart from the way locals live to increase their safety? Would you have women traveling solo hide in their hotel room all day and night long unless accompanied by a friend? Because those are the only ways I know of to completely avoid the risk the public harassment. And sadly, even that is no guarantee of personal safety as I have received reports of even expensive hotels in various parts of India where the staff attempts to assault or harass solo women travelers. Even RoseChasm's "choice" to stay in India long enough to "develop PTSD" is apparently to blame in Polly's account. Now granted if someone is experiencing traumatic experiences while traveling, I would agree it is likely healthier for them to leave a trip earlier than expected if their finances permit. But leaving early isn't always an option for people. There's also the fact that PTSD by it's definition is "post-traumatic," meaning symptoms are experienced only after the trauma is experienced and thus leaving early would not necessarily prevent PTSD nor is it easy to predict when or if someone will experience PTSD. Every statement Polly writes in this paragraph starts with the phrase "she should," implying that RoseChasm is responsible for the violence she experienced in India and the trauma she endured as a result because of things she either did or didn't do. If the author of this response was hoping to dispel misconceptions regarding foreign women's experiences in India, I fear she fell far from the mark. On the contrary, it seems this author contributed a few new misconceptions. 


If what we hope to find in RoseChasm's piece is a deeper understanding of the phenomenon of gender-based violence in India, then there are certainly plenty of problems with her account. But I find it highly unlikely that this was in fact RoseChasm’s intent. From my reading of her piece, RoseChasm’s iReport is a testimonial of her personal experience in India, written in response to all the friends and family members who demand exciting, happy travel stories  from someone whose experience didn’t allow her to generate them.  As RoseChasm herself says in the closing line of her piece: “This is the story you don't want to hear when you ask me about India. But this is the story you need.” Because of her traumatic experiences, RoseChasm could not fully participate in that ritual so many of us feel obliged to endure when we return from a trip—the sharing of travel stories. Because no one wants to hear a downer. Rather than shutting down and avoiding discussing her experiences, she chose to make it fully public and open to critique from others and eventually released her real name to the media.
 
RoseChasm’s iReport is an act of bravery. It takes courage to share experiences like this in a public forum, in a way that leaves you open and vulnerable for attack and criticism. This is something I understand all too well. Every time I click “publish” on one of these entries I experience a new dose of terror, knowing that I have placed yet another personal experience relating to harassment on the internet in a truly public forum available for everyone to read, analyze and criticize. I write and post about these issues, not because it is easy for me, but rather because it isn’t easy for me.  As long as one person benefits from what I write, the risk is worth it to me. But then again, I have never shared an experience so personal as what RoseChasm wrote. And for that alone, if nothing else, she has earned my respect and admiration.  
 
Before I finish, there is one more issue I think should be addressed if we are to fully benefit from RoseChasm’s story. As a public educator, I am highly invested in providing students and other travelers with resources to enable them to travel safely. RoseChasm’s experience greatly concerns me. Is there a way we could have better prepared her for her travels? How do we prepare students for study abroad programs in places like India, Egypt and Kenya with record-high percentages of harassment and sexual assault? Is there a better way she could have been supported while on her trip or after returning? I have no hard-and-fast answers, merely vague ideas. So I want to open these issues up for discussion. I welcome your responses to this post, but I request everyone be polite and respectful.  What are your thoughts regarding how we can best prepare solo women travelers heading to India, Egypt, Kenya, and other places with high rates of harassment and assault? What are your responses to RoseChasm’s (or anyone else’s) iReport?
 
 
*Disclaimer: This article does not necessarily reflect the views or opinion of the University of Chicago, the Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations, or any of its affiliated faculty or staff members. The views contained therein are solely the opinions of this author and should not be taken as representing the University of Chicago or any of its representatives.

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. 

Finding the balance between immersion and self-expression

The more I talk with female (foreign) travelers about this subject, the more I come to realize there is a dichotomy in ways of approaching traveling in places like India as a woman. Most women that I have talked with seem to fall into one of two camps.  The degree of nuance in the arguments from either camp may vary, but the essence is clear.

One camp, which I will call the ‘Western-feminist’ camp argues things such as the following:
Regardless of of differences in cultural norms, women should be respected. Things such as wearing local clothing and obeying outdated gendered conventions concerning appropriate body language, appropriate conversations with Indian men,  appropriate social behaviors (smoking, drinking, etc.) simply to please Indians is counterproductive because it communicates that it is acceptable to continue to treat their women (and us) as objects and does not help women gain respect and independence. We should be free to do what we like, and express ourselves just as we would in our home country. They have to learn to respect us. Dressing locally does not truly ‘earn’ respect, therefore it may be better to simply dress respectfully but comfortably.

All of the above statements may not pertain to everyone in this camp, but you get the general idea. The other camp, which I will term the ‘Pro-local’ camp, argues things such as the following:

We are guests in there country, therefore it is best and most respectful to immerse ourselves by behaving exactly as local women would behave. We should dress like them,  and only engage in behaviors that are considered by socially acceptable for our gender. We should avoid doing anything that local women wouldn’t do, such as conversing with Indian men (strangers), going out after dark, walking alone, smoking or drinking. By doing this we earn the respect of Indians and eventually others from our home countries will be respected like us.  Women who dress and behave ‘western’ perpetuate the problem of lack of respect for foreigners.

Likewise, everyone in the ‘Pro-local’ approach may not agree with every statement here. However I think it is fair to say that most female travelers I have encountered tend to lean heavily towards one side or the other. Sometimes the side of the continuum to which they hold may change after travel, or they may eventually gravitate towards the center on one side or another, but to me it is striking how passionate female travelers I have spoken with talk about these issues.  I have seen and heard both approaches advocated by women of various educational backgrounds and various degrees of experience as travelers. I will say that I have noticed female scholars tend to lean more heavily towards the ‘Pro-local’ side of the spectrum, whereas other travelers (such as tourists) who may be more interested in personal comfort and less interested in interacting with locals throughout their travels often lean towards the opposite spectrum, though that is certainly not always the case.

Both views I think are problematic.  From a social-scientific and historical perspective, it is clear that the ‘Western-feminist’ approach has it’s problems. Countries such as India with a history of colonialist rule are not likely to respond well to critiques from western women, especially white women.  Even in the areas of India less affected by colonialism, suggestions made by westerners, no matter how well-intended, will be distrusted by enough people that they will not make a significant difference. Change in post-colonial developing nations such as India, has to come from within, as it did in the case of Gandhi’s movement. There is currently a lot of support for ‘modernization’ of India, meaning developing of India’s infrastructure and educational systems, and progress in certain social issues such as women’s rights in a direction that is modeled after those in Western developed countries. There is also a strong resistance to this development by many politicians, scholars, and individuals who argue that to change the system is to lose what is essentially “Indian” and replace it with “Western” values.  These opponents argue that Modernization/Globalization is leading to a deterioration of family values and social norms which is needed in India to maintain a moral  society. This is exemplified in the post I made 2 weeks ago about Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee’s responses to the increase of rapes in West Bengal. She stopped just short of blaming “modern permissive society” (i.e. western-influenced changing gender norms and norms governing dating) for the incidents of rape. In this case,  we, as foreigners wearing western clothing and behaving “inappropriately” simply serves to illustrate the “problem.” If foreign ways are considered counter to Indian culture, then foreigners exemplifying this does not necessarily help Indian women advocating this cause. In other words, dressing and behaving ‘western’ may in fact be harmful to the cause already underway by Indian women.  When a foreigner dresses “inappropriately” (not covering one’s legs, shoulders, and chest), it does not convey solidarity, it conveys disrespect.  In short, the situation in India is complex. Indians (including Indian women) are fighting on both sides of this issue. Given its colonial past, many Indians are (understandably) resistant  to ‘Western’ (i.e. ‘white’) ways of thinking and governing.  But is the ‘Pro-local’ approach better?

I think there are ways in which the ‘Pro-local’ approach may also be problematic from a women’s rights perspective. It is evident that many women in India want to see India become a place more hospitable to women. Where women can go out past dusk (currently 6pm) without fear of assault. Where women (Indian and foreign alike) can walk the streets alone without fear of harassment. Where they can wear what they please and work whatever job they prefer. In Delhi in particular there has been a huge movement towards this. July 31, 2001 “Slutwalk” reached Delhi. While less risque in dress than it’s US counterparts, it clearly sent a message. The Chief instructor for the Noida branch of Seido Karate informs me that every time there is a rise in reports of assaults in Delhi, all the Delhi martial arts instructors are sought after by individuals and businesses alike for self-defense seminars for their female workers. In more urban cities such as Delhi and Jaipur, I have seen many middle class and upper-middle class Indian women (like Indian men) wear Western clothing or  alternatively hybrids outfits consisting of a Kurta or Kamize shirt over jeans.  In places where Indian women wear Western clothing or hybrid clothing, what is conveyed by a foreigner wearing a salwar kamize? In places where Indian women are struggling for their independence by defying their own norms by walking alone and behaving in non-traditional ways, what does it convey when a foreigner acts more  “Indian” than the Indian women themselves. Are we not then undermining the defiant actions of the same women we claim to be imitating?

This is certainly a complex topic and I am not advocating one approach or another. How to behave and dress while traveling must be a personal decision. Every woman, foreigner or Indian, has the right to feel safe and secure and live free from harassment. From that perspective the ‘Pro-local’ approach is certainly more pragmatic. From personal experience, I can attest that dressing locally and behaving as is expected of Indian women in a given region does cut down on harassment. But is it always the right thing to do?  As female travelers, I think it is essential to make informed decisions about how we want to dress and behave throughout our travels. That decision will certainly be influenced by what regions we will visit, how we travel within a city (alone or in groups, by foot or by rickshaw/auto) and what our purpose is there (tourism, research, study, work, etc.). I  would add that our decision-making process should be informed by another consideration, and that is:

We should decide for ourselves what is our priority when  we are “traveling while female.” Is it to be an ally for Indian women? Is it to live as safely and harassment-free as possible? Is it to make contacts and forge networks with Indians? In other words, I suggest that our dress and behaviors should be consistent with our individual goal(s) as a traveler in India.

If we are researchers, women seeking the respect of members of various communities in order to do our work, then the more immersion-focused 'Pro-local' approach is understandably more favorable. If we are traveling for a particular project, especially one that requires consent and respect of established members of a community, then adhering to gendered behavioral norms is more likely to allow us access to what we need as researchers. Likewise if as researchers and workers, we are in India for a long time, then comfort (such as living as harassment-free as possible) is naturally preferable.  But there are still problems with this approach. While many female scholars and female workers in India have earned the respect due their gender, it is often only the case *after* they have married. I myself have recently experienced how being an (apparently) unmarried female scholar may result in you being less respected. While this is starting to change, in traditional Indian culture, if you are not yet married, then you belong to your father, and therefore you are not yet an adult. An unmarried scholar is then in some ways a contradiction of terms. A child cannot be a scholar. Therefore your credibility may be challenged.  I’m beginning to think that perceived singleness is a larger factor in street harassment than I previously understood. Walking about alone will often mark you as ‘single’ whether or not that is the case. There are certain things that can mark you as ‘married’ (such as mangala sutra necklaces, the red hair dye in the part of your hair and matching toe-rings on the middle toe) and I have been told that people who do those things (in particular the mangala sutra necklace) experience less harassment once those signs of marriage are visible. Though I am currently unmarried, it has been suggested that I too adopt one or more of those marriage indicators to cut down on harassment.

But for me the issue is where does the performance end? How ‘local’ is ‘local enough’?  Where does one draw the line with dress and behavior? Do I stay at home unless escorted by a male friend or colleague? Do I travel only by rickshaw or auto?  I have personally taken the stand that as an unmarried woman, I will not wear something indicating me to be married. I choose to dress locally in whatever way is appropriate to the place I am staying in, but I draw the line at faking a marriage to gain acceptance and ‘respect.’ But that is my personal stance.  Others may (understandably!) prefer to appear as ‘respectable’ as possible to make their stay less uncomfortable and I wholeheartedly support them. But for me, although I will continue to encourage foreign women to dress as local as they feel comfortable doing for their own protection (and for some may even recommend faking signs of marriage), I know there are problems with this practice. In Varanasi and Jaipur, I wear Salwar-kamize. In more tourist-inhabited places like Delhi (and while traveling on AC class trains and tourist buses) I may wear (loose-fitting) western pants under a Kamize/kurta and may wear the dupatta draped over my shoulders but not my head. And in places like Dharamsala, heavily populated by foreigners and exiled Tibetans, I may forego the dupatta altogether.  I make this clothing adjustment willingly, intentionally, and knowingly. I am also aware that these choices may result in potentially increased incidents of street harassment in the areas where I choose to ‘compromise’ on clothing.   But that is my informed decision. Likewise, I choose to walk —only during the day—but nonetheless I walk alone (un-escorted) to my destinations rather than take rickshaws, tempos or autos. I personally can’t justify paying money for a journey that I can easily do on foot. And I appreciate the exercise of walking.  I sacrifice some personal comfort for it, but again this is my informed decision. I make these choices consciously, choosing *not* to completely immerse myself the entirety of a trip.  But since I have only so far traveled in northern areas of India and only in mostly urban cities (large and small) and urban towns, I have this luxury. Perhaps if I were living in a village I would feel differently. 

Obviously this is a controversial issue as many of my friends, colleagues and classmates in the past have quite vocally advocated one particular mode of dress/behavior over another. So I open this up for discussion: What are your thoughts? Where do you personally draw the line between immersion and self-expression through dress and behavior while traveling in places like India? 

Being an ally for victims of sexual harassment

It’s recently been brought to my attention how often forms of sexual harassment and assault are suffered in silence.  Statistics on rape reported in this recent article indicate that at least 54% of rapes go unreported.  Since starting this blog, several female travelers (that I know) have contacted me to share their experiences. Each admitted to suffering (mostly) in silence.  Like for the Hungarian woman (see this entry) who was dangerously close to being sexually assaulted, more extreme incidents of sexual harassment are sufficiently traumatic that often women often prefer to block the painful memories from their mind, rather than relive traumas by admitting them to others. Even women who suffer from less extreme forms of sexual harassment (such as leering or the local equivalent of catcalls)  may experience trauma over time if the experiences are continuous and/or recurrent. 

I started this blog because I know that not every female traveler is comfortable using their voice to share their experiences. It takes boldness and courage to admit something as personal as feeling vulnerable to sexual harassment. As an independent, educated, career-oriented woman, I myself take pride in my ability to “hold my own” so-to-speak against the male-dominated academic fields in which I operate. How then can I be admit to feeling vulnerable to the mere glance (leer) of a man in another country? After my first trip to India, in which I endured memorable and painful incidents of sexual harassment, I too suffered in silence. Despite being (figuratively) surrounded by female colleagues and professors with whom I could have discussed these things, I remained silent. It was truly embarrassing to me—too embarrassing—to admit that I was vulnerable in this way. I felt ashamed. It was years later that I found my voice and developed the confidence to volunteer for a local violence prevention program and eventually start this blog. Sometimes even now I wish I could be thicker-skinned than I am. Sometimes I wish I could proudly walk through the streets in India dressed however I like, impervious to the comments, leers, provocative gestures, attempts at groping, stalking and whatever else.  Perhaps to an extent we all wish we could be thick-skinned and just shrug it off. But perhaps then there would be no need for this sort of blog. This blog exists because no matter how thick-skinned we are, we are human beings. And how people treat us impacts us. When we perceive that we are being treated as less than human because of our gender, race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, or anything else that forms a part of our identity and over which we have no influence or control, it affects us. No matter how thick-skinned we are, being treated as subhuman based on our gender will be painful. There is no shame in this. It is not shameful to admit that others have hurt us. We did nothing to earn or deserve this treatment. We are the victims. Admitting this vulnerability does not make us less strong—it makes us stronger. It takes courage and strength to admit vulnerability by sharing your experiences with others. Sharing is important for healing; it is also an important first step for helping prevent others from being victims. Street harassment has the potential to escalate to other more dangerous forms of violence. It does not always stop at words or gestures. As other women have reported, in India as elsewhere, it can and does escalate to stalking, groping, indecent exposure, and even assault.  Street harassment too is a form of violence and should be treated as such.  

I want to use this opportunity to ask anyone following this blog to please consider being an ally to those who are currently suffering from or who have suffered from sexual harassment, assault or any other form of violence. It is hard for victims to find a voice. When a victim actually finds their voice, it is essential to support them and encourage them in any way one can.  If someone approaches you, or even just openly admits to having suffered a form of violence—no matter the degree—the best thing you can do for them is simply to listen. Hear what they have to say without judgment. This is not the time or place for suggestions as to what they could have done let alone what they “should” have done. The best thing you can do for a victim of any kind of violence is to be a good listener. Let them know that what they say matters and that you want to support them and help them however you can. The worst thing you can do for that person is to be unsupportive by “correcting” them, or in any way minimizing or invalidating their experience by inferring or implying it to be less than it is. When a victim finds their voice, it is a time to be encouraging. Your words need not be eloquent, or long-winded (like mine), but they should be supportive and encouraging.

It is only when a victim has gained sufficient distance (temporally and emotionally) from a painful situation that they can even be open to well-intended advice. The time gap necessary will depend on the intensity of the experience and the degree of emotional trauma endured. At that point, it might be appropriate as an ally to suggest they talk to others about their experiences in whatever way is most meaningful to them. They might prefer counseling or therapy, or they might find more closure in group meetings with others who have had similar experiences. Or you might recommend to them articles or online resources (such as Traveling While Female, or these handouts) to help them process their experiences.  If there are local violence prevention programs or self-defense courses, it might be appropriate to recommend those. But it is never appropriate to minimize or invalidate a victim’s experiences.

I ask this of all my readers—whether you consider yourself susceptible to the type of sexual harassment discussed in this blog or not—please consider becoming an ally for others. Listen, do not judge, and do not minimize their experience. Be encouraging, and be active in sharing resources like this blog with others.

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.

Travel guidebooks and blogs on sexual harassment

I will be following up with more nuanced discussions of aspects of the previous post, but first I want to explore a new issue—the ways in which Western-based travel guides  and women-oriented travel blogs designed for westerners address or prepare women for issues of sexual harassment in India. 

Travel guidebooks and online resources
I happen to have the Lonely Planet guide to India on me, so I’ll mostly discuss this book. The Lonely Planet devotes 2 pages to women and solo travellers in which information ranging from appropriate clothing, safety in transportation to finding travel companions to save money on autos and taxis is discussed.  This is incidentally identical to the number of pages devoted to avoiding scams in India. I don’t disagree with any particular advice given in guidebooks like this. If you want to minimize harassment, wearing local clothing, or at least modest Western clothing with a dupatta (scarf) draped over your shirt as suggested in the Lonely Planet and similar books will certainly help. Likewise traveling in higher classes of trains and tourist buses or finding travel companions are valid ways to minimize the risk of sexual harassment and sexual assault in the form of groping. In fact there is some really good advice in these types of travel books. I single them out however for two reasons: (1) they focus on prevention almost exclusively and offer little advice for women who are being sexually harassed or assaulted and (2) the almost nonchalant attitude expressed regarding sexual harassment in these books, which I think encourages female travelers to minimize their own experiences and shrug them off rather than face them. Consider the following suggestion from the Lonely Planet,  “Be prepared to be stared at; It’s something you’ll have to live with so don’t allow it to get the better of you.” While it is true that a more nonchalant attitude towards staring will make a visit to India less uncomfortable for a woman traveler, I think it’s problematic to be encouraging a woman to shrug off staring so quickly. There is no taboo in Indian culture against staring as there is in most Western countries, which is what the author meant by the above statement. Thus staring can just be a sign of either boredom or curiosity and not necessarily a big deal. However in a section devoted to women travelers I think it’s a little premature to urge women to simply ‘get used to’ staring. Because of the lack of taboo regarding staring, most forms of sexual harassment in begin and end with staring. Staring can be accompanied by lewd verbal propositions, provocative gestures, being followed, being bumped into and/or groped, and/or other invasions of personal space of a woman, all of which are certainly taboo in Indian culture.  This sort of attitude inadvertently encourages  women to accept and get used to unwanted attention and advances in India which is problematic. 

The biggest problem that I have with these types of resources is that they are only preventative in nature. They focus on minimizing the risk of sexual harassment, which is undoubtedly a great idea. But prevention is not 100%. Depending on where you stay and for how long (longer stays in smaller places means more exposure, so locals often, but not always 'get used to you'), a woman may still receive sexual harassment on a daily basis especially if she is looks ‘atypical’ (i.e. unusual hair style, hair color, or clothing).  As an example, a red-headed colleague of mine had to cover her hair completely when she walked around in Jaipur, even though she lived there for 2 months, because otherwise she would get catcalls every few blocks. I personally would advise red-heads to cover their hair as often as possible for that reason. Several African-American female colleagues of mine in the same city reported that boys would occasionally approach and touch their hair without permission and then run away. While perhaps not sexual in nature, it is still a form of harassment which can over time wear down on someone, also known as microaggression.

But more importantly, what happens when attempts to avoid harassment fail? What happens when you do get harassed? What’s the culturally appropriate response? When is it best to ignore and when is it best to respond? How do locals respond to inappropriate advances? This is the type of information that should be made available to women travelers. If not in these guidebooks, then where?

The Lonely Planet guide suggests two external (non-Lonely Planet affiliated) web resources for women travelers. However after perusing their articles for information about sexual harassment, I was very concerned with what I found. One of the websites (www.wanderlustandlipstick.com )  seemed promising at first glance since it includes many blogs, several of which seemed to contain information regarding sexual harassment. However a search for “harassment” only came up with nine entries, one of which downplayed the risk of sexual harassment and assault and mostly focused on advising culturally-appropriate clothing. Two other blog entries made reference to the cultural heroine Sita’s being  sexually harassed by the demon Ravana (from the Ramayana), one blog denied the existence of sexual harassment in the Middle East, one made reference to being ‘harassed’ (questioned for IDs) by Chinese soldier, and another referred only to be harassed for money in India. One helpful blog pointed to a book titled “Safety and Security for Women who travel,” which might actually be useful.

But the article that takes the cake for being problematic is this one, which essentially takes the Lonely Planet guidebook’s attitude of “Get used to being stared at” to its far extreme and asserts,

Have I been stared at? Been on the receiving end of catcalls? Fondled? Had men expose themselves to me? Ignored in foreign restaurants?  Yes!
Do I see this as being ill-treated? No!
My response to situations, whether travel-related or not, directly relates to how I will see the world and also how I will continue to be treated. I could be pissed off that a waiter at an Indian restaurant chooses to only speak to my husband when we are traveling together or I could remember that I’m a guest in his country, try to understand where he’s coming from and then make a decision that I won’t visit that restaurant again.

So what exactly is wrong with this? While this woman is clearly aware of the problem of sexual harassment, she conflates sexual harassment with genuinely culturally-appropriate gender relations in India. Her statements presupposes that all of the above behavior is culturally-appropriate in India. Only two of the above five experiences listed are actually culturally acceptable in Indian society: staring (which Indians do even at each other), and women being ignored in foreign restaurants (which can happen in Muslim areas, but is extremely rare elsewhere). The other three: catcalls, being fondled, and men exposing themselves are not, I repeat not acceptable in Indian culture just as they are not acceptable in Western cultures. Putting all five of those instances in the same category of harassment is problematic because (1) it conflates sexual harassment with authentic Indian social norms and (2) conveys an attitude that women should simply accept sexual harassment out of concern for offending the target culture. The fact that an Indian women would not accept any of those last three items is unfortunately irrelevant for this critique.   

The other website recommended ( www.journeywoman.com) has a useful search engine which gave me 40 hits under the word “harassment”.  The entries linked from the search engine were more diverse (covered more countries than the previous site), but each article read more or less the same. Women are advised  to wear conservative and/or local clothing and act modest, they are informed that men will stare, and they are informed that men may try and touch them and the way to safeguard against this is to wear appropriate clothing, don’t get into the front seat of a taxi (true in India as well) and don’t accept a hotel room if it doesn’t lock from the inside (a good rule of thumb even in your own country!). But most entries focused on appropriate clothing to wear. Sadly this website falls victim to the same critique I levied against the Lonely Planet and similar guidebooks: what do you do if and when prevention fails and you are harassed? 

A manual I was given by an academic program I attended last summer is so far the best resource I have seen, though it has its problems. Included along with all of documents sent to us on water and food safety, availability of toiletries, and so forth was a 10-page word document on “How to Prevent and Combat Sexual Harassment,” which we were encouraged to read before coming. Eager for more tips, while preparing for my trip last year, I read every word. It was the best thing I have seen on how to prepare visiting students for incidents of harassment. I was indeed quite pleased to notice the disclaimer which indicates awareness that these are survival strategies and not ways to stop sexual harassment at its source: “The suggestions given below are short-term ways of coping with sexual harassment. They are not meant to substitute for broader efforts to educate people about and eradicate sexual harassment.” The manual contained very detailed and quite extensive advice to (mostly women) as to what behaviors, clothing, etc.  are considered ‘appropriate’ versus ‘inappropriate’ in India as well as advice for safety tips while traveling alone. I was also  pleasantly surprised to read practical advice for dealing with public groping or inappropriate touching (they suggested carrying a needle to poke potential gropers with), which is something the guidebooks shy away from confronting. This guidebook also suggested learning and memorizing a few phrases in the language of the area you’ll be visiting to shout out if you are being harassed, which for students attending a language program is a fantastic idea---not so practical for everyone else.

In short, it is a quite useful manual, and contains much information I would consider essential for any woman traveling without a male companion in India. But unfortunately as a result of its length and tone, it leans more towards the opposite end of the spectrum of the above blog.  I remember thinking to myself most any woman reading this who hasn’t been to India before is now likely to be scared out of their wits, fearing being harassed or molested every step of their trip. One girl in the program admitted that after reading that manual, she had been terrified because she didn’t yet have any local clothes and was literally expecting to be harassed on the street the entire time until she got local clothing.  So clearly the manual borders on overkill. Unfortunately because of overemphasizing the risk of sexual harassment, there was a kind of “boy who cried wolf” effect. Because most of the women in the program were not harassed immediately, they dismissed the manual (and its information) as being mostly unnecessary and thus minimized the very important information in the manual. After all, if the threat is not as imminent as promised, when why be prepared?  While fortunately she and ever woman in that program remained safe from physical harm, almost every woman in the program was sexually harassed in some way, some more often than others. So again I ask: what is the appropriate cultural response to harassment? Shrugging it off as “Indian culture” is factually inaccurate and dangerous.

The advice to Females Traveling to India that I wish was in guidebooks:
The first step is for female travelers to be educated in what are actually the cultural norms and expectations so that you always know what you are communicating. It is important to know that staring at a woman is not taboo in India (except for certain Muslim sects). It is not appropriate for a woman to stare back, or even to make eye contact for too long. That is generally interpreted as sexual interest. If you do not want to convey sexual interest, do not make prolonged eye contact and do not engage in even idle conversation with men when possible. There need be no concern about being polite or friendly enough. Being quiet is not rude, it is respectful and sets boundaries. If you intend to flirt, by all means be friendly. But if you do not want that attention, do not chat. But for any man to even touch an woman who is not his wife is taboo and should never be accepted.  Men will often (but not always) vacate a bench when a woman sits down.  It is not acceptable in India for a man to ask a woman questions about her marital status or anything to do with her dating habits and it is not appropriate for a woman to participate in that conversation. Answering questions of that nature is considered flirting. Women accompanied by a male travel companion can talk more freely with an Indian male if the male traveler is present, but even then, questions regarding marital status or dating are inappropriate. Any such questions are best avoided using both body language (turning face and body away from questioner) and verbally, by remaining mute. It is also acceptable to calmly asserting that the question is inappropriate, but that may invite them to question further, so be careful..

It is important to point out that in Indian culture Indian women are allowed to ask other women questions about marital status, and will also routinely follow up by asking your age, if you have any children, what you do for a living and (sometimes) how much you make. Each female traveler has to decide for themselves when to answer what. It is always acceptable to inform them that in [insert your country name here] we don’t ask those questions, and then decline to answer them.

Local clothing is extremely helpful. In part because it’s comfortable and dries quickly when you hand-wash it. But also because it often cuts down on harassment because it shows respect for Indian culture and conveys modesty. Also the dupatta is an effective tool for responding to excessive staring (by men). When being stared at by men, it is appropriate for a women to drape the dupatta (scarf, also sometimes called chunni, depending on where you are) over her head and then temporarily shield her face and turn away from the staring male. This communicates that you are being appropriately modest and the male is violating the (Indian) expectation of respect for women. I’ve tried it. It works about 85-90% of the time for me, but  I’m also quite pale and have light-colored hair and thus receive more harassment than darker-haired or darker- skinned foreign women. For others it may be even more effective.

It is always appropriate in an Indian context for a woman to get indignant and angry and yell at offensive men, especially for stronger forms of harassment such as touching, being followed, or if at any point you feel ‘trapped’. Actually, it’s not uncommon for an Indian woman to get offended and yell over things like being overcharged as well, so the power of your voice should not be underestimated. The offending male will back down (from whatever he is doing) and generally apologize profusely, begging the woman to not be angry. Why? Because it is embarrassing for the man. Capitalize on this. In extreme situations, you can also hit someone with your shoe or alternately throw your shoe at someone. They will be (rightfully) offended and generally leave.  Since this is a highly offensive move, it should be saved for when all other verbal techniques have failed  and should only be used if you feel threatened. There are of course a variety of physical self-defense techniques that can be learned and practiced which are helpful. Any kind of physical technique would likely surprise the offending male and convince them to leave. Women are not generally taught to defend themselves in India (nor are men, for that matter), so any kind of  physical response will have the element of surprise.

In situations where you feel uncomfortable because of Indian males, seek out female company, Indian or foreigner. I know female travelers who prefer second or third-class AC trains over 1st-class trains, because there are more people in the berth in lower AC trains and hence a greater chance of there being other female allies. You always want there to be another woman around if possible, so a 1st-class AC is inadvisable. Also try to avoid general (non AC) class, because theft, groping and so forth are more common there. If you have to ride general class, then find a family or group of females to sit beside. Similarly, sit down next to females rather than next to males on buses, chai stalls, etc. Indian women in particular are great allies. They are more likely than Indian men to speak up when another male is being inappropriate and come to your defense. Befriend Indian women. It will give you added protection and it gives you a way to safely interact with locals and learn more about the culture.

Always talk with other females who have been to where you are going before traveling. But here’s the caveat. Not every female traveler is as knowledgeable as others about travel advice. There are three qualities that  I would recommend searching for in a female traveler to solicit for advice. I think this is valid advice regardless of where you want to go:

1) Look for a female who has spent significant time (3 weeks minimum but longer is better) in one given place. Six months in India staying in each town no more than 3-5 days (or even a week) is not equivalent to a 2 month trip of 4 weeks in each spot. Always solicit advice from females who have done homestays if at all possible. If not, then ask advice from those who have stayed the longest in one town or city. Many countless female travelers that I have seen throughout my travels only truly see glimpses of India. They spend less than 2 days in a given place and spend at least 50% of their time in transit. While this is a valid style of traveling if you want to see more places in a smaller amount of time, the amount of depth that person will experience of the culture is commensurately small. They will have lots of great advice for finding the best deals on hotel rooms for short stays, bargaining with  travel agencies, and for finding safe restaurants off the bat, but by spending so little time in an area, they will not learn enough about the culture of that area to understand the complexities of gender dynamics to prepare you for issues of sexual harassment. Look for women who have several ‘friends’ in a given area. That often indicates they have spent enough time there to have people to go back to visit. If the person can’t tell you their favorite place for chai, they likely haven’t been there long enough to advise you (though that’s not a hard-and-fast rule). In my experience, there is something that happens when you spend more than a week  in a place. Locals start recognizing you for one. That is generally a good thing. Many countless travelers come through and they learn nothing about the foreigner and the foreigner learns nothing about them. Foreigners become numbers on a scorecard of how many thalis or how many minutes of internet they sold on a given day. Likewise, when you stay for a longer time, you learn more about the culture and habits of the place. You learn where the locals drink chai. You learn what time the locals go to temple (if they go). You learn where they shop, what’s the best way to get around, and where to find the best prices. And you learn to accept and experience a city or town as it is. The longer you stay in an area, the more you converse with locals, the more you learn about Indian culture (in that area) and the better equipped you are to handle questions someone coming to India for the first time may have. Those that stay in each place for only a few days simply don't have the time to immerse themselves and thus their understanding of Indian culture, let alone what constitutes sexual harassment in India is limited. These are the people who will produce blogs like the above that puts staring and  men who don’t make eye contact in the same category as indecent exposure.

2) Look for females who have traveled alone around in the target country. There is often a huge difference in experience between a woman who has traveled with a male companion and a woman who has traveled with one or more female companions and one who has traveled alone. Women accompanied by men are harassed considerably less often (if at all). Women travelling with other women are harassed quite often, but still less frequently than women travelling alone.  Women who have successfully gone anywhere in India alone will be better equipped to advise you how to be safe and the best ways to respond.

3) In India, look for women who have spent their significant time in the state or area you want to visit. There are ways in which each state in India can feel like a different country. I imagine other countries can be quite similar in this way. Villages are vastly different from towns and towns are vastly different from cities. And cities are vastly different from tourist hot spots. It is important to point out regional differences. For India, some states (Himachal Pradesh, Punjab) are much more relaxed and open to foreigners than others. Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in particular are known for being the roughest states for foreigners, let alone for foreign women to travel in.  Seek out people who have spent time in the state (if not the city/town/village) that you intend to visit for their advice. Pay attention to how the female foreigner says they spent their time. If they spent a month in Dharamsala attending Buddhist teachings or a month in Manali or Leh, Ladakh doing treks, or if they spent a month hopping around from city-to-city within a given state, their experience is going to be different  from someone who lived for a month in an apartment in Delhi, or did in a homestay in Varanasi.  Trying to learn about Indian culture from tourist places is like hanging out at Times Square in New York to understand the way New Yorkers live.  In cities known for sight-seeing such as Delhi, Agra, and Jaipur, it is easy to only see the tourist sites and rarely (if ever) interact with locals apart from purchasing a few things or hopping from auto rickshaw to auto rickshaw.  However, even in tourist cities, many women do succeed in interacting with locals through homestays, paying guest houses (bed and breakfasts) or even just by chatting (appropriately) with locals in restaurants, temples, and mosques. So always pay attention to what the traveler you are asking tells you about their travel style: where they spent the most time, and how they traveled and try to determine how applicable it is.

I hope this has been a helpful post. In my next update, I plan to talk about more general approaches to safety while traveling, including how and when to appropriately use fear as your guide.