“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman” was what actually changed my life at fourteen . Lying innocuously on a shelf at home, flanked by a Freud and a Jung, “The Second Sex” was enticing if only for greater promises of “interesting” content- there was a nude woman on the cover. I opened it for a preview into “adult” literature. I read it and became an adult.
Feminism, the equality of the sexes, women’s lib- were not mere words. I grew up in a very gender-equal household. My mother, my hero, was very much a person of substance and the atmosphere at home as far from patriarchal as my parents could make it. But there was the outside world. The whole universe of school with its underlying “women must be good wives and mothers above all” that the convent tried vainly to beat into us, the terrors of growing up and becoming aware of ”eve teasing”( what a euphemism for being made to feel guilty for perverted groping and catcalls) , the television with its “family friendly- so women need to be shown their place” content and plethora of views on “appropriate” behavior, apparel that everyone at large threw about. Yes, I was born female, but they were trying to make me inferior.
And also the over-compensations that a trying-to-be-politically-correct society threw around. “Only one child, but daughters are as good as sons” something I had got tired of hearing or the “highest marks among girls”( as if they were a rare beast whose every achievement needed to be lauded). It was confusing. It was painful. And it was very disheartening at times. But then there was “The Second Sex” and with it came the relief of discovering that the dilemma was not unique to me alone.
It was empowering. The discovery that my sex was not a limitation. That I was who I thought I was. And that alone sustained me , indeed sustains me in trying to be who I am , a person, a complete person.
Something which, by the very virtue of my sex the universe at large still tries to deny me and others like me. Why else would a female politician be a “token” candidate as the presidency in India has proved- or the descendant of a political dynasty as the Bhuttos, the Gandhis, the Kumartunge(s) have time and again shown. Why else would a Hilary Clinton be analyzed on her clothes, her laughter, her tears- everything but her politics. Why else would the “goddess” or the ”slut” dichotomy exist still into the 21st century? Or indeed why would woman power be seen as emasculating, when it calls for equality and greater growth for both sexes.
1 comment:
women being a sex object, sperm recipient, or a mother is a known thing. Where as woman as a boss, an equal, a President is not. So anything to undermine her call her ball buster, boner shrinker, hootchie..yaa it so it goes.
Post a Comment