Bombs that exploded on our face - A reality check!

“Cheat me once, shame on you. Cheat me twice, shame on me.” I heard that from someone long time back, and yes it still hurts. Yes, as a nation we might as well say the same line to our politicians, but if we feel that they might get hurt enough to act, well we would be naïve. For we have been cheated quite a few times and well nothing really has happened.

If there is an undertone of sarcasm and pessimism in the first paragraph, it is because that is my state of mind. It is because ‘we Indians’ (I hate using this phrase) characterized by our lethargy and indifference (‘chalta hai’ attitude) coupled with the fact that we are as corrupt as our politicians are, have given a safe haven for terrorism to flourish. The term ‘we Indians’ includes me and I am as responsible as are the rest of us.

Let me begin with a few examples of egregious neglect by the authorities concerned. All of us must have heard the news about the CCTV cameras at Karol Bag NOT WORKING. Also, the CCTV cameras at Cannaught Place (CP) were installed to observe, not record. Does this surprise you? No, I guess not as government authorities are just living up to their image of being impotent! However, for the naïve, let me sight the next example that will elaborate how our system works against the safety of common people.

This example was narrated to me by a CEO of an engineering company who I met on one of my business calls. As you maybe aware, as per government specifications every shop and public place such as cinema halls is supposed to be fitted with water sprinklers. The law is strict and if implemented would have augured well in case of tragic events such as Uphaar Cinema case where so many innocent lives were lost. One would imagine that lessons would have been learnt from the Uphaar Cinema case. However, the reality is that status quo exists. The CEO was on a business call with the owner of a public place that was supposed to fit water sprinklers to adhere with the government notification. During the discussions meant to finalize the terms and conditions, the owners demanded a margin and insisted that the engineering company need not install functional sprinklers and can rather just install a cheap version that need not work. In return, the persons concerned demanded a hefty margin. They gave two hoots about precious lives that maybe lost in case of a fire. The industrialized refused to do the work under such conditions not only because it would have been unethical, but also because he did not want to face responsibility the way Ansal Brothers did in the Uphaar Cinema case. (Though I am confident that the Ansal Brothers will walk scout free, just as the likes of Sanjay Dutt)

So in case you are wondering how and why the CCTVs installed at Karol Bag were not working, the case above will tell you why! Someone would have made riches at the cost of innocent lives that were lost.

It is important to have strict laws, rules, and regulations, but at the same time perhaps it is more important to that they are implemented properly. It is the implementation and not only formation of laws that will result in tackling the menace of terrorism. A case in point would be the example about the Indian drivers who flock to the Middle-East in search of better quality of life. These drivers, who on Indian roads are nothing less than merchants of death, mellow down when they drive in the Middle-Eastern countries. The same drivers, who break traffic rules with impunity in India, suddenly adhere to every rule and regulation in the Middle-East. It is surely not because of stricter rules and regulations in the Middle-East, but because of stricter implementation. As a result the drivers are aware that not adhering to rules will result in heavy penalty. It is important that we have laws that are sacrosanct and that the authorities responsible for their implementation have the powers to implement them without interference from the bureaucracy and the politicians. However, we all know that neither the bureaucracy, nor the politicians have the will to act.

To conclude, you and I can keep cribbing to our graves, but unless we thinkers become doers and start demanding action from the authorities concerned, nothing really is going to change. Our politicians and bureaucrats are a reflection of us as it is we who have voted them in power (ideal term should be responsibility). Sadly, they cheat us more than the terrorists bomb us. The worst part is that there is a little (sadly in many cases big) politician in all of us!

Animal Ancestry of Man

If Darwin were alive today, it would have been a cakewalk for him to prove the animal ancestry of man! That is, if Darwin were to use Indian subjects such as personalities from Indian media who are a part of the new genre of reality shows and so-called talent hunts.

Before I get into the flow and let my thoughts take over, let me forewarn the reader (as I always do) that I will speak my mind and therefore if I seem to cross the line, it will be because I intended to do so! For those like me, who cringed at the sight of a 16 year old girl being hectored by so-called ‘responsible’ adults, it is time to introspect and investigate the root cause of such animalistic behavior on part of the judges.

Yes, the Shinjhini Sengupta incident has sparked off a National debate regarding the sanctity of so-called talent hunts and reality shows. When the judges of a dance show (telecast in a Bengali TV channel) rebuked a 16 year old girl with impunity, they betrayed the basic essence of a human being, i.e., being humane. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the episode is that, may be we are the closest link to the apes. After all, have we not aped the West in every aspect? Was it not enough that we copy the concept of hit shows such as ‘Dancing with the stars: Nach Balliye’, ‘American Idol: Indian Idol’, ‘Are you smarter than a 5^th Grader? : Kya aap panchvi pass se tez hain?’ etc? Did we really need to ape the Western/America essence and should we not have at least made these shows more Indian?

To answer most of the questions above, let me point out the root cause of such vituperative remarks by the judges of various talent/reality shows that has become a commonplace. The name is Cowell, Simon Cowell! Who you ask? Mr. Simon Cowell is one of the three judges of the hit FOX musical reality series; The American Idol. Despite all the talent on display, it is Mr. Cowell’s harsh putdowns of the participants that viewers look forward to. The popularity of the show lies in the sadist pleasure that a majority of the audience derives from the humiliation that some of the participants face. This is not just my opinion, but a conclusion that can be derived from pure numbers. More than 23 million viewers follow American Idol (and some Indians on Star World) and Simon Cowell is one of the highest paid Television personalities in the US. I am sure that most of our Indian judges would have done an Anu Malik, i.e. aped Mr. Cowell to pump up the TRP ratings of their respective shows. The term ‘aped’ is what made me ruminate; is there any reality/talent shows that we have not aped from the West? Did the conduct of the judges and their curt remarks to a 16 year old find its roots in Indian culture? At least for the latter question, I can say a firm ‘NO’! However, sadly that only makes me conclude a firm ‘YES’ for the former question.

Perhaps some of us (so-called human beings) are still evolving and have been fooled by our physical resemblance to the most advanced of the species. For what else can justify our animalistic instincts? We have been aping everything Western: movies, lifestyle, culture, etc.

Nothing comes closer to proving the animal ancestry of man than ‘The Roman Colosseum (originally known as the Flavian Amphitheatre) that has witnessed some of the bloodiest battles between exotic animals and between gladiators and wild animals, with the latter being the most popular. Now, let me juxtapose the events witnessed at the Colosseum with what we regularly witness in the so-called reality/talent shows. The similarity is quite striking as you might conclude from below:

1. Gladiators were people who had to fight against their will as mostly they were prisoners of war who were given the choice to fight or be slaves. Juxtapose that with today’s participants of the reality/talent shows and at the first instance one would feel that sure they have a choice! Or do they? In the cut throat competition that we experience today in every field as a result of abundance of talent or due to problems of plenty, these shows become a platform to get noticed. Often, for this reason the likes of Shinjhini Sengupta will find themselves performing in a Colosseum like atmosphere, ready to be taken apart by the exotic animals, i.e., the judges.

2. The few Gladiators, who managed to survive, enjoyed great popularity. History tells us that women would pay large sums of money so that they could spend a night of passion with one of the Gladiators. Juxtapose that with the popularity (minus the part about women for I cannot vouch for that) that the likes of Abhijit Sawant (of the Indian Idol fame) enjoy. Surely there is no harm in that.

3. The defeated gladiator (often wounded and on the brink of unconsciousness) would plea for merci. The audience at the amphitheatre shouted either in favor of the Gladiator’s plea to let him live or in favor to put him to death. The emperor would have the final say on whether the Gladiator lives of whether he is put to death. Juxtapose that with what a participant faces at the end of a performance; often wounded by the judges, a participant would plea to the audience to vote for him/her in order to live to fight another day.

With the passage of time, the civil society abandoned those parts of the games that included the death of humans. However, history seems to be repeating itself and today Colosseums are replaced by grand stages and the exotic animals by judges such as Simon Cowell. The judges (likes of Cowell) wounded Shinjhini to such an extent that she suffered a paralytic attack. Surely man has evolved to a stage where such acts on the part of the judges will be condemned equivocally.

Surely we have left behind the animal ancestry of man and become human beings. Or have we?

August 15, 1947 – Independence Day - Is it sixty plus or minus years of development for the Indian Society?

I have often wondered about the significance of Independence Day that we Indians celebrate on August 15. The National Flag is hoisted and there is sense of pride that is pervasive across India amongst every Indian (that is what we like to believe). Yes, it is a matter of pride to achieve freedom after 200 years from a foreign power! Perhaps it was a day of graduation for Indians; from second class citizens to just plain citizens of India. The ruling government at the centre was for the people, of the people, and by the people. Democracy was to be the foundation of free India. India was to be a progressive nation characterized by equality of status for every Indian. My question to the reader is, “As an individual, do we feel equal?”

The incidents of recent past have made me ruminate and question the very essence of Independence that we Indians take for granted. Be it the incident of Raj Thakrey pandering to the difference of race and sect, or be it the questionable decision in favor of reservation for the OBC at various educational institutes. All this has been happening with the acquiescence of the common man (or woman) and unfortunately as Indians, we have become impervious to such incidents. We will seethe in anger but will remain reticent. If at all, there will be a smattering of protest that will eventually die down due to the lack of leadership. Such a tepid response to issues of National significance will have an insidious and long lasting effect! It is this fatalist attitude that has contributed towards fermenting many issues that will have virulent repercussions in times to come.

No incident has captured the attention of whole of India as the issue of reservation of 27% seats for the OBC. The opponents to the system (including me) have called it “Death of merit” and the proponents of the system have called it “Fair and just”. At this point I will not delve into the merits of the system as it should be a totally different article that should be presented after proper research. However, my question is whether such decisions are creating a divide in the society? My personal observation is that it will have an adverse impact on the concept that is the foundation of India; Unity in diversity. The smattering of egregious incidents (as a reaction to reservation) that the media has not reported in National interest is the presage that we should take a note of. The resentment amongst those who lost out (General Category) and the cracks in our society is real and palpable. The presage should be clear enough for the politicians to abstain from promulgating the proposal of reservations for SC/ST/OBC in the professional world. Not only will it be a social disaster, but also an economic disaster. In 60+ years of independence, successive governments have failed to create the much required infrastructure in the education sector and now the UPA has sought to atone for that inaction by adopting short cut methods that are to the detriment of one section of the society. Rest assured the next government at the centre will indulge in one-upmanship and implement reservation in jobs.

The incident involving Raj Thakrey highlights that our politicians have taken a few lessons from history. They seem to have adopted the strategy popularized by the British; Divide and Rule. The concept that Maharashtrians are ethnic Mumbaikars and North Indians and Biharis are the dregs of their society seems to be a perfect strategy to promulgate a struggling political party. However, the proponents should remember that the Divide and Rule strategy adopted by the British created a Pakistan. The need of the hour was strong condemnation of Raj Thakrey and his goons by the central government and the Supreme Court. In some of the Middle Eastern countries, prosecution by handing out a death sentence would not have been far fetched. Sadly, in India, far from prosecution, Mr. Thakrey seems to be basking in glory and walking around with his head held high for what he seems to have achieved; market his party. Does he care about the virulent repercussions of his statements in the short and the long run? I don’t think so! Will at least the Mumbaikars (so called ethnic Mumbaikars and others) condemn the acts in the best possible way by uniting and voting out Mr. Thakrey and his likes? I surely hope so! That will perhaps reflect backbone (or the lack of it) of the Indian society.

A look back at the British rule and we will find that despite all the fallacies, they attempted to take the Indian society forward. Their efforts in abolishing the Sati system and child marriage, support of education for girls, implementing railway system, etc would be some of the examples. Juxtapose that with the recent reservations based on caste, lack of progress in the education sector, ruling by a court in favor of Sati system, etc, and the contrast will be clear; Indian society is in a rewind mode.

To conclude, let us introspect and honestly answer a question, “Has the Indian Society progressed from what it was as of August 15, 1947?” In my opinion, our rulers have pressed the rewind button. I just hope that someone will find the remote and press the STOP button and maybe even press the fast forward button!

Jai Hind!

Do we know the Shoaib Akhtars of the world?

Yes, I know the Shoiab Akhtars of the world! Perhaps, at some point all of us have know them, worked with them, and tolerated their eccentricities. They are perhaps the most consummate professionals and perceived as an indispensable asset for an organization. At the same time they are also known to be a true curmudgeon and are vituperative towards the subordinates and colleagues alike. However, the management will overlook all the negative attributes just because they are perceived as a star performer who is supposed to take the organization forward towards the achievement of its goals. My question to the reader is whether an organization is justified in pampering the Shoaib Akhtars of the world or should it repudiate such characters?

In my opinion (based on my limited experience), such so called ‘Star Performers’ are known to have a deleterious effect on an organization. Let me elaborate my opinion by defining a paradigmatic Shoiab Akhtar that we encounter in our professional life. In a sales organization, a Shoaib Akhtar would consistently achieve/surpass his targets. He would crack all the big ticket accounts, make the maximum incentive, and demand the highest increment. He will negotiate the best discount for his customers, do away with maintaining the sales process, and always be late for work. Also, he will keep the HR on its toes as a result of his never ending demands of recognition; monetary and otherwise. On a lighter note, in all probability, his system password will be ‘iamthebest’.

So why would the Shoaib Akhtars of the professional world have a deleterious effect on an organization and its stakeholders? After all, they are star performers and maybe it is justified that are valued accordingly. At this point I will pose a question to you (the reader); in your professional experience, would you say that a Shoib Akhtar takes an organization forward towards the achievement of its goals? After all that is what an organization expects! Let me pose a few more questions that may strike a chord with you (the reader).

Q-1: How does a Shoaib Akhtar react to success?
A-1: In all probability, he belittles his subordinates and colleagues alike

Q-2: How does a Shoaib Akhtar react to an occasional failure?
A-2: In all probability, he blames others (his boss, subordinates, x-colleagues, unreasonable clients, etc) and everything else (the economy, the product/service, etc) rather than introspect.

Q-3: What does a Shoaib Akhtar do in case of a burnout?
A-3: In all probability he pollutes the office environment with his tantrums. He pulls down every upcoming star performer whom he would view as a threat, and badmouths the very top management and the HR organization that was desperate to appease him.

Q-4: What does a Shoaib Akhtar do when all avenues of blaming others are exhausted and he moves on to the next organization which considers itself ‘lucky’ to have hired a star performer?
A-4: He moves on with his baggage of frustrations and again badmouths his x-organization, x-boss, x-colleagues, amongst others.

To conclude, I will take a stand that it is prudent to let go of a star performer, no matter how brightly he shines. I was impressed by the PCB as it realized that Shoaib Akhtar is doing more harm than good to the team. He was not taking the Pakistani Cricket Team forward. The Shoaib Akhtars of the world are continually insolent and the world of cricket and indeed the professional world alike are better off without such characters!

My cousin MBA!

“My son has already done his MBA” said my aunt with a sense of pride that was evident from the glow on her face. My aunt felt that she had ample reasons to be vocal about her son’s achievement. The son in question has always been an average student (just about), was never known for any academic achievement, and yet has successfully completed his MBA at a very young age of 23 years from a ‘Top 20 B-School’. As a MBA from a similar background, the statement resonated with me for all the wrong reasons. My aunt did not seek my imprimatur but I felt her statement reflected parochial biases. I wanted to forewarn my aunt about the possible upcoming challenges for her son, but at that point it was not prudent to burst her bubble and risk her opprobrium.

So why was I reticent? No, it was not because I doubted my cousin’s ability! Neither did I wish to be irreverent towards my aunt’s family. However, one must be aware of my background to be privy to my thought process.

My professional qualification is a MBA (PGDBA) from a top notch business school of India. As far as my academics is concerned, I was always an average student (unlike my cousin, I always bordered on above average). However, a striking similarity was that just like me; my cousin is also an MBA from a family of Doctors and Engineers. Even with the best of intentions, his family will not be able to guide their son towards the right professional path. In my opinion, it is sacrosanct for a professional to be aware of and well prepared for the challenges of his/her profession. Perhaps it would have been prudent for my cousin to match his area of interest and skill sets with the subjects that he chose for post graduation. (Believe you me; he would have been an excellent fashion designer)

In the Indian system, every parent would want their son (in some cases even daughters) to join the professional ranks at the earliest possible. The obvious choice for my cousin would have been to become a doctor or an engineer. However, as he was never an erudite, MBA was the next best option. It was perhaps the safest bet as an aspiring MBA would have a plethora of options. (Just like it was for me, the IIM B-Schools were never an option) The rule of economics that perfect competition will inevitably churn out quality products and services at a price dictated by the buyer should probably augur well for his ambitions. Unfortunately, the surfeit of Business Schools does not guarantee quality professional training! In fact quality does not even figure in the priority list of most of these colleges.

The most galling aspect of these Business Schools is the number of unemployable professionals that they churn out. If UGC and AICTE were to recognize these institutes on the basis of the quality of output, more than 3/4th of them should have been de-recognized. However, similar to the manner in which questionable credit ratings of some of the financial instruments contributed to a crisis across the global markets, the questionable recognitions has adversely affected the most important resource of India; its manpower. My cousin joined a B-School that figured amongst the questionable 3/4th majority after vacillating for a long time. It was also with my acquiescence!

As my cousin continued to balk at the prospect of making a career choice that his parents wished for him, I had more reasons to be concerned. At this point, I will elaborate my concerns with an excerpt from the interview of Mr. Kris Gopalakrishnan (Cofounder and CEO, Infosys Technologies) published in Harvard Business Review (South Asia – March 2008). In his interview he highlighted the vagaries of the Indian system that almost ruined his career. The term ‘Indian System’ refers to the Indian middle class that is full of parochial biases and the Indian education system that is characterized by its inflexibility. Mr. Gopalakrishnan’s parents were the paradigmatic Indian parents who could envision their son either as a doctor or as an engineer. They discouraged him from joining a subject of his choice and the result was that he landed up in a professional field that was not linear to his aspirations. His parents were keen to see him join the professional ranks (as a doctor) at the earliest possible and his love of science (not biology) was not linear to their aspirations. Just like other children belonging to the India middle class, he too sacrificed his aspirations and pursued his parent’s dreams. The result could have been catastrophic as not only he failed to secure a seat to fulfill his parent’s dream, but also in the process lost two valuable years. Also, what added to his woes was the Indian education system that makes it very difficult to change subjects midstream. He finally started an undergrad course in Physics and if it were not for an inspirational Physics professor, his career would have drifted away to obscurity.

In my opinion, today Mr. Gopalakrishnan is the much admired leader because the universe conspired to script his success story. (In a lay man’s term, “He got lucky!”) He did not have the conviction to follow his dreams and maybe even believed that his parents knew what was best for him. Maybe he lacked the maturity and the experience to decide his career path. After all a man/woman becomes an eligible bachelor at the age of 21/18, but has to make a career choice at the age of 18. Both decisions have a long lasting impact on our life and I often wonder why a man/woman needs to take a call on his/her career path at such an early age, especially when the average age at which both the sexes prefer to get married is increasing steadily. Do we not encounter n number of personalities in our social life? Yes we do, and it helps us to make better choices in life! In the same vein, should it not be sacrosanct that professionals gather some work experience before they make a long lasting career choice? At this point I would like to pose a few more questions to the readers:

Q-1: How many B-Schools in India insist on work experience?
A-1: Very few

Q-2: What is the motive of the above?
A-2: To increase the universe of choice! (There is tough competition for the aspiring MBA’s money amongst the surfeit of Business Schools)

Q-3: Are the fresh graduates capable of understanding the nuances of MBA curriculum?
A-3: For the majority; NO!

Q-4: Will the MBA course provide a positive ROI?
A-4: Yes & No. Yes in the long run as far as the monetary aspect is concerned. No in the long run as far as self-actualization is concerned.

Note: There are many exceptions to the above. If the reader is one of them, maybe he/she should stop and think if they are an exception or the rule.

My concerns for my cousin are all of the above. Maybe he will find inspiration in the same way as Mr. Gopalakrishnan did. Maybe he will be an exception. Maybe this article will be food for thought for him and others in a similar situation.

Till that time, the gregarious me will dither but still say, “My Cousin is an MBA”

Movie Review - Blood On My Hands (Director: Anandana Kapur, Surabhi Saral, and Manak Matiyani)

The movie was about how girls approaching puberty learn about their bodies. It talks about a woman’s menstrual cycle, a marker of her fertility, that renders her untouchable and subject to multiple taboos and regulations.

The popular movie was screened once again on 10th March, 2008 at Habitat World (India Habitat Centre) on the occasion of Woman’s Day.

My Opinion about the Movie: An excellent movie and an eye opener.

My opinion about the issues discussed by the short film

Firstly, as marketing professional and as someone who has followed the series advertisement of sanitary napkin (catches the eye) I was shocked to know that despite all the changes in the shape and sizes of the sanitary napkins, the product has hardly undergone any qualitative changes. The improved versions are not only expensive, but also scarcely available In India. It is the worst example of Product Driven Marketing in India. What about the popular jargon, “The customer is a King”? Maybe the Marketing Heads of the sanitary napkin manufacturers got quite literal and assumed that since ‘The King’ (a man) does not complain, all must be well. Maybe somebody needs to point out that in this case the consumer is a Queen! (A Woman)

Juxtapose the above with an issue that men face in their daily life. Yes, I am talking about shaving and how much of an onerous task it would have been but for the technological improvements. (e.g.: the Gillette series of razors) One might argue that basic necessities (undergarments) for women have seen similar advancement in style and design. My opinion is that the improvement has been spurred by the need of a man’s pleasure rather than a woman’s need. This same logic would also apply to the cosmetic range for women.

Therefore I strongly believe that if women become less of a fatalist consumer, they will help themselves in more ways than one.

Secondly, it is the woman who would demand the packet of sanitary napkin to be covered by a translucent paper as she feels embarrassed. My question is that what will happen if a man notices the packet? Will he cringe? Maybe he will. Will he object? Yes, maybe initially he will object. But is it not natural? Do we (men and women alike) not fear or take time to accept the unknown? In my opinion, men will gradually become comfortable with it. If not, why should it matter?

Finally, the movie also briefly mentioned an egregious incident from India. It referred to an incident where five government-run mental institutions sought hysterectomy for 330 mentally retarded girls and women (In 1994, hysterectomies were performed on 17 girls at a Shirur home). The government justified its backing of the hysterectomies as it felt that inmates would not have been able to maintain hygiene as they were uncooperative with the care-givers. Irrespective of the IQ levels of the mentally challenged women, this was a gross violation of human rights. Imagine the public outcry if a similar proposal is made to castrate men who are mentally challenged. It would simply never pass!

P.S: I did not share my opinion on the core issue of how women’s menstrual cycle, a marker of her fertility, that renders her untouchable and subject to multiple taboos and regulations. However, I have experienced situations where women are not allowed inside a temple without bathing as they are considered ‘ashudh’, whereas men are allowed even without a bath. That is something that women should find hard to swallow. If women can be Goddess in Hinduism, I am sure we should be broad minded enough not to follow these man-made infantile restrictions.

This entry was posted on Friday, March 21st, 2008 (I migrated from blog.co.in)

Do women feel equal?

Okay, now that I have grabbed your attention, let me state my position; Women are equal to men in many aspects of daily life. Hold on! You ask why ‘many’ and not ‘every aspect of life’? Thought so! Let me present ‘my opinion’ succinctly. Women are equal to men in many aspects (not all) because in some aspects they (women) are better. It is just a question of whether the reader views a glass as ‘half full’ or ‘half empty’.

Phew! Now that I have stated my position, let me forewarn the readers that this article is entirely based on my opinion and I have taken the stand after ruminating about it for a long time. The limitations of this article will be the fact that as a male writer, neither will I be able to empathize with women and nor am I privy to their thought process. However, in my opinion, fatalism is the root cause of many issues that women face in their daily life. To add to that, women themselves have contributed to their sufferings because of their non-confrontational attitude that has allowed issues to ferment over ages. Finally, this non-confrontational attitude is a direct off-shoot of the Stockholm syndrome.

Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response that is oftend discussed in reference to a situation in which an abducted hostage shows signs of loyalty to the hostage-taker, regardless of the virulent reprucussions. The hostage-takers are the men who have in the past and unfortunately still continue to impose themselves and their stand on what is right or wrong on the women (the hostages). Although there has been a veritable rise in the number of hostages that have been freed, women continue to dither in claiming their rights. This segues nicely to my next point.

What stops a woman from claiming their rightful status of equality? It has been a man’s world for ages and it has been a repressive regime as far as the women are concerned. Therefore, if women have wrongly assumed that “The Man’s World” would suddenly become quiescent, they are grossly mistaken. Men will always balk when faced with the prospect of granting equal status to women. But why do women need a man’s imprimatur on the basis for equality of status? It is perhaps that women are still adapting to the new found status of equality. Just like a tigress (chose not to give the example of a bird as I feel that would have enervated a woman’s status) that is raised in captive struggles initially, maybe women are going through a similar phase. Unfortunately, typical to Stockholm syndrome, many women continue to remain loyal to their abuser (the man) even when the world has opened up to them.

In India, no one demeans the status of women than Ms. Ekta Kapoor does. (Purely my opinion) Her serials would depict the paradigmatic image of a woman as a ‘Home Maker’ or a ‘Home Breaker’. While the former augurs well for the image of a woman, the latter suggests that a man hardly ever is a ‘Home Breaker’. There would be more vamps than villains. Then there is the surfeit of advertisements of Fairness creams and the like for women that promulgate all the wrong messages. Swarthy (dark skinned) complexion has been portrayed as a disadvantage for women in their professional and social life. The paradigmatic woman of today is someone who rubs shoulder with the men (also in the sun) professionally, manages all the household chores, and still manages to look pretty (mostly with fair complexion). Surely in a man’s world, it is the man who promulgates all these wrong messages with impunity! Or should women share the blame? I leave the judgment up to the reader as I will not be able to substantiate a stand with facts.

One can quote many examples from daily life about women suffering from Stockholm syndrome. For example, between the husband and wife, it is the wife who is always be expected to compromise her ambitions. I may still find that acceptable as in any society (Indian/Western) the status of the family is more often than not determined by the status of the man. It would be egregious for a man to be in a position where he has to be a ‘Stay at home’ father, even if such a situation was temporary. However, what I find extremely galling is a scenario where women seek comfort in this system and even demean other women who attempt to achieve their professional goals. How dare a woman expect to have the freedom of choice? This is the hostage-taker’s (a man) restriction echoed by the hostage (a woman).

Even today women are bound by the strictest norms of society. A woman must remain within the social boundaries, failing which they must go through an ‘Agni Pariksha’. The term (Agni Pariksha) is associated with Sita, daughter of the Earth and wife of Lord Rama. As is well known, Lord Rama banished his pregnant wife (Sita) to the forests on the banks of the Ganga, based on the suspicions of his subjects about Sita’s purity. (This is after she was rescued from Ravana who had kidnapped her) The most refreshingly modern aspect of the Hindu Mythology is that in a situation where she was to finally re-unite with her husband (Lord Rama), she chose rather to return to her mother (the Earth) than go back to her husband. Unfortunately this defiant gesture failed to percolate the right message through as Indian men are quick to say, “How dare she cross the Lakshmanrekha!” She was deemed punishable by fate for overstepping the authority of the men. Today, despite women’s liberation and existing laws that support equality, women continue to observe this line of control. Why cant today’s women who are no longer hostages to the men, have the courage and the conviction to follow their heart?

To conclude I will say that women need to break the mental barriers and get over the Stockholm syndrome. Women need to believe that they are equal as by doing so, they will command and not demand equality.

This entry was posted on Friday, March 21st, 2008 (I migrated from blog.co.in)