In J&K, Gender Is Just a Political Tool

By Rekha Chowdhary

The recent turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir has brought a lot of visibility to women in the public space. Both in Jammu as well as in Kashmir they have become the face of protest politics. For many this can be interpreted as a sign of their emancipation and empowerment. Have they not succeeded in tearing down the male bastion of politics by joining the processions and leading them from the front? But the issue of empowerment and emancipation is not so simple for the women of this state, who have been facing the trauma of conflict for the past two decades.

Conflict has touched women across the regional and religious divide and they have emerged as its worst sufferers. They have been the victims of violence from every side - whether perpetrated by the agents of the state or the militants. Many of them have been sexually abused, many have been widowed, many are still struggling to find the whereabouts of their husbands and live lives of 'half widows', many are stressed by the trauma of displacement, and many are facing the onslaught of the fundamentalist forces. However, they have not been able to articulate their suffering from the point of view of their gender identity.

Interestingly, the state presents a picture of multiple identity politics. Besides the Kashmiri identity politics, there is Jammu's regional identity politics; the sub-regional identity politics of Doda, Leh, Kargil, Poonch-Rajouri; tribal identity politics of Gujjars and Paharis; and so on. In this scenario, there is no space for the politics of gender identity.

It is taken for granted that women will follow the dominant identity politics and identify with it completely, even when it may be in contradiction with their gender interests. The issue came on to centre stage a few years ago when women of the state - rather than uniting on a very important gender issue - got divided along regional lines.

The issue related to the Permanent Resident Status of married women illustrated this point. By an administrative anomaly, the women of the state tended to lose their right to the Permanent Resident Certificate if they married outside the state. Such a provision did not apply to men. A High Court decision that was aimed at correcting the anomaly was seen as endangering the Kashmiri identity and there was pressure on Kashmiri women in the Valley to identify with the ongoing opposition to this move. The response of Jammu women, although apparently more gender sensitive, was neither spontaneous nor autonomous and was organised by the male-dominated political parties, which saw the issue more from the perspective of the inter-regional divide than from a gender perspective.

However, this is not the only issue where gender identity has been rendered subservient to 'political identity'. Almost on any issue where women could have bonded together and raised issues on a common platform, they have been divided on regional, communal and other lines. Political identity, in almost all cases, takes precedence over gender identity.

The manner issues of violation of gender rights are framed within the context of identity politics indicates how limited is the politician's concern for women. Issues of sexual harassment and rape are seen as an assault on the community. Two instances suffice to underline this. The first is that of the infamous case of Kunanposhpora, a Kashmiri village, where all the women were alleged to have been raped by the security forces. The case forms an important part of Kashmir's human rights discourse and is cited by various social and political groups of Kashmir as one of the worst cases of the victimisation of hapless Kashmiris by the Indian State. However, despite the anguish expressed about the sexual exploitation of these women, the village remains almost abandoned and the women face the additional stigma of being raped.

The second instance relates to a 'sex scandal' that had surfaced a few years ago. A number of state officials were involved in promoting the sex racket. In this case also the whole issue was seen more from the perspective of the community rather than that of women. It was projected as an affront for the Kashmiri community and its cultural ethos.

It is because of this co-option of the gender identity that the women's movement has bypassed Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). Since women are not organised on the basis of gender and do not count in political terms, some of the national policies and institutions meant to empower women have not been extended to the state. In the rest of India, millions of women have been the beneficiaries of the 73rd Constitutional Amendment (that reserves a third of the seats in local bodies and village councils for women). However, the women of J&K remain untouched by this provision. Similarly, they do not have access to the National Commission of Women. The casual approach towards women is reflected in the fact that the Chairperson of the State Commission for Women was unceremoniously removed some six years ago and the Commission has remained headless ever since.

Meanwhile, the conflict situation has aggravated competitive identity politics. As the recent agitation in both Jammu and Kashmir has shown, there is an increasing gulf among people and sharpening of both regional and communal identities. This has clear implications for women's politics. Women are not only coming under the influence of reactive political parties but are being projected as the major agents of divisive communal and regional politics.

Women's empowerment and emancipation are ultimately connected with their gender consciousness as well as with an increasing sense of being a collective. But the current conflict situation in the state does not allow women to either assert their gender identity or unite across ethnic, regional and communal lines. As long as this conflict continues, issues of gender will continue to be subordinated to other issues of identity and women in J&K will continue to pay a heavy price.

(Courtesy: Women's Feature Service)

India: Individual Choice On Abortion: Myth or Reality?

Women's Feature Service

(An extract from 'Indian Journal of Gender Studies' [Volume 15, Number 2]; Published by Sage.)

New Delhi (Women's Feature Service) - It is evident that an emphasis on individual rights does injustice to the complexity of the woman's as well as disabled person's experiences. Let us consider the scenario that disabled people confront in a society where being normal is the ruling ideology. Considering that disability is defined in medical terms and normality is defined by powerful social normative standards, choice can be anything but free. Furthermore, there are people with a range of different disabilities, different life experiences, different material needs and different ideological perspectives. Although technological developments enhance the sense of choice, in reality they tend to push decisions in a predictable socially desirable direction.

In contemporary India the technology of prenatal determination of foetal characteristics has disadvantaged both girls and the disabled. With the advent of these technologies more and more pregnant women are encouraged by doctors to go in for prenatal screening. In such a context, the pressure on women to exterminate that which seems to depart from the norm is immense. But as Veena Das (1986) has argued, this decision is in itself by no means based on autonomous choice implied in discussions on the morality of abortion. Furthermore, as she points out, it is not inscribed in the nature of things that a physically or mentally retarded individual should have a poor quality of life. It is the great value accorded to autonomy and competition that appear to make this a self-evident fact.

Indeed, new technological innovations have already made it possible to select an embryo at the outset rather than to abort an unwanted foetus afterwards. The abortion debate may thus become irrelevant in the not so inconceivable future. The critical question, then, is the issue of choice. As a recent report on assisted reproductive technologies by SAMA Resource Group for Women and Health states:

It is difficult to distinguish between latent choice and social choice shaped by family, market, and other agents. Unless we draw this line, there is no limit to theoretical choice and everything, including sex selection, can be justified in the language of choice. What society does is to promote one variety of choice while silencing the range of options. The society closes the option that women can be happy without children [or daughters, or disabled children] (2006: 101).

While individual choice must be promoted, what needs to be addressed is that this choice takes place in a particular social space in which disability has a negative connotation. Consequently, it is difficult to say how much real choice is involved. If you choose to bear and rear a disabled child, it appears to be illogical and ridiculous. As Adrienne Asch (cited in Blumberg) has written:

Suppose Down syndrome, cystic fibrosis or spina bifida were [sic] depicted not as an incalculable, irreparable tragedy but as a fact of being human? Would we abort because of those conditions or seek to limit their adverse impact on life?

To communicate that 'You must have a test' or 'You must have a termination' without analysing the implications needs to be problematised. We need to provide mothers and fathers with multiple accounts of how they might lead a life with a disabled child. As Jason Kingsley, a 17-year-old boy with Down syndrome, puts it:

I have a disability called Down syndrome. My bad obstetrician said that I will never learn and send me to an institution and never see me again. No way Jose! Mom and Dad brought me home and taught me things. He never imagined that I could write a book. I will send him a copy of the book so he will know. I will tell him that I play violin, that I make relationships with other people, I make oil paintings, I play the piano (Kingsley and Levitz 1994: 27-28).

(An extract from 'Indian Journal of Gender Studies' (Volume 15, Number 2); Published by Sage; Price: Rs 395; Pp: 360)

(Courtesy: Women's Feature Service)

   _   _