Saturday, July 26, 2014

Sania Mirza is an individual first then a daughter or daughter in law

Recent obnoxious statements by some BJP and Congress MLAs in Telangana about questioning the Indianness of a very successful and celebrated tennis player Sania Mirza created a lot of uproar. This totally unnecessary controversy started when the newly appointed government of the newly formed state of Telangana appointed her brand ambassador of the state. Maybe some politicians were not happy with her appointment or maybe they were not happy that she was being paid money to do this job. They have the right to raise their concerns or objections but there is a civilized way to raise objections to these types of issues without making any personal obnoxious remarks. BJP leader K. Laxman called her "daughter-in-law" of Pakistan and questioned her credentials for this particular honor. Calling her daughter-in-law of Pakistan was not required to question her appointment for this job. These lawmakers are looked at as role models by their supporters, if they use this type of language then it sends a wrong message to their supporters. But it was good to see so much support for Sania and condemnation of this statement from many people. These statements show at least two problems present in Indian society. First, it shows their attitude towards women, where many people fail to look at them as individuals, women are always looked at as someone's daughter, sister, wife, daughter-in-law, or mother. Why can't they consider a woman as an independent person with no labels or any relations attached to her? Second, it shows an unjustified bias against certain communities by doubting their patriotism, particularly Muslims or in some cases Christians. Both these problems are a result of ignorance of people and stereotyping of particular gender or community.

I still remember the way they used to teach us why to respect women (or girls), we were taught to respect them because they are also someone's sister, mother, or daughter; the point they wanted to make was to respect other women as you respect women with whom you are related. It was always because she was someone's sister, mother, daughter, or wife not because she was a woman or an individual irrespective of any relationship tag. Why can't we respect everyone just as an individual, just for what they are rather than bothering about who they are? How long do we want to continue with this patriarchal mindset? This mindset is reflected in such comments where many men as well as women fail to look at women as individuals with no tags of relationship or social status attached to them. Another disturbing trend that has been going on for decades in Indian politics and which doesn't show any sign of going away is that whenever any such statement is made political parties either try to justify it or just distance themselves without condemning it or taking any action against the individual in question. I support absolute freedom of speech so according to me these individuals have the right to say whatever they want to say. I have no objection to their right to say these things. If their parties believe in freedom of speech then I welcome their stand of not taking any action against that person for making such statements. But these parties don't believe in freedom of speech, at least their past actions do not indicate this, so, I wonder what is stopping them from condemning such statements. Aren't they indirectly supporting these statements by not condemning them? Do they believe in the bystander's approach? 

Sania is a well-accomplished sportsperson in her own field. She has won many competitions for her country and also has been decorated with many awards and honors. If anyone has any problems with her suitability for the job of brand ambassador, then they should have raised their objections by asking relevant questions, not by questioning her patriotism, personal life, or relationships. These other things are not relevant to the matter of her being a brand ambassador. Just because Sania is married to a Pakistani national she doesn't become a Pakistani, it doesn't give anyone a license to question her patriotism. She is an accomplished Indian and doesn't need to prove this to anyone. She is an individual first and then she is someone's daughter or wife or daughter-in-law. If people can not respect her as an individual or independent woman then they won't respect her no matter she is who's who. I don't have any hope from these traditional political parties who cite hundreds of political compulsions for not criticizing such statements, they keep pointing figures at each other as if pointing out others' mistakes to legitimize their own mistakes. But I expect all rational Indians to object to such behavior. This patriarchal mindset and this bias against any religion or community need to be challenged. No one needs to prove their patriotism just because of their gender or religion, this must stop.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:

2 comments:

  1. I didnt read all of your blog on this but I got the jist of the story and it seems to be a politacal issue and nothign to do with her being a woman etc etc.
    It seeems you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
    She married a Pakistani and naturally people are not going to be happy that she is made ambassdor of somethign or another.
    Off course there are decent ways of saying such thigns --thats the only bit i agree with you on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the mistake many people do, try to judge the book by its cover. Please read the post and then comment about relevant points mentioned in the post. Someone's marriage is totally personal issue and it doesn't take away anything from their professional life, I hope people are mature enough to understand this.

      Delete