Needless to say but...

Not that I am too emotionally overloaded particularly because of the Delhi rape case. But certainly the views that have come up in open in the past one month makes me write again on this. Yes I am overloaded because of the alarming situation. This is not a stray case, our national capital has also been the rapist paradise for years now and slowly other cities are also catching up. From my Delhi friends as well as my stay for few months in Ghaziabad and various adjacent areas, I do know how women cope up there. As a woman living various phases of my life in Kolkata, Hyderabad, Pune, I have also faced eve-teasing and have learnt to consider the security factor, always. Villages aka Bharat is sill safe or they say so, just because Police stations are far away or actually non-existent, and people don’t report most of the cases because "izzat ka sawal hai".Not that these views of politicians, media, spiritual gurus(high on spirits) and common man, including me, were not at all known before, but certainly the nation seems to react now. And hence comes my second post on particularly the topic of why girls should not provoke guys, should not stay late, should not party, in short , stay back, stay out of the mess to avoid getting trapped in the mess.

After reading through various channels, what I discover is the main reason behind these people telling the women to dress properly or "behave" is that they feel today's women's actions titillate the man. The man with his innate carnal desires and unadulterated innocence is simply not able to control his feelings and ends up eve-teasing, molesting, and raping. Now in most cases it is seen that girls who are perfectly decently clothed get raped. So this has to be definitely 2nd order titillation. So this bechara guy, who generally comes from the uneducated, socially deprived background, comes to a modern city, sees lot of micro-mini clad girls and gets provoked. He knows he cannot get most of these women. But simply because these women have done the crime of provoking the guy, now that he is turned on, he ends up raping another girl who has nothing to do with this "inviting" nature of girls. Now that brings me to question few things:

1. If wearing lesser clothes is provoking etc, then would the TV commercials stop showing skin for the ads of every single product on earth. Be it deos, briefs, cookware .
2. Would guys give up their share of watching porn to keep them away from all ill-effects?
3. Would movies be banned for showing rape scenes and item numbers that increase their viewership to manifolds’?
4. Would all adult movies be banned?
5. Would Internet be censored?

Even all this doesn’t ensure completeness of the theory.Titilation may be different for different people. And guys may have their own interpretation of whether a woman is inviting or not. Some common theorems are:

1. If a woman is wearing skimpy clothes, she is inviting. Even if she says "No", the first interpretation is above all
2. If a woman has had multiple relationships in her life, with some of them even intimate, she is definitely slut.Hence inviting. Are relationships and forced ones same?
3. If a woman is staying late at night, if she is a party hopper, she is inviting. Well the premises of night are strictly not meant for girls who don’t want to get raped. The vice versa is also true.
4. If a woman is a single woman-unmarried (post the standard age of marriage), divorcee (oh!!That’s why!!), widow (unlucky one) that is w/o a legitimate male owner, then she must be inviting.
5. If she does not "listen", if she is adamant, if she is helpless(hence needed some help), if she is working late nights, if she is a boss' favorite, if she has got a promotion too soon, even, if she tries to be a man(hence needed to be reprimanded).....the list is endless.Also cannot help asking if a slut not have the right to say "No" ?

Agreed on the fact that 90% of our population comes from the economic and social "have not" category. They neither have the enlightened thought processes like us-the middle class or the access to every possible luxury on earth like the rich. But this provoking theorem makes only these “have not’s” take the onus of being lecherous and ill charactered.Have we forgotten Priyadarshini Mattoo case? Don’t the "high profile", "born pub trotting" men happen to see girls around them in skimpy clothes all the time? Then what titillates them? Or they are immune to all kinds of frustration and brutality?

 

Now come on, man and woman have always mutual attaction.Thats normal. A man may like a woman or vice versa. But then it’s important to understand and respect her "No". If we are to make an impact and make our surroundings more secure, we need to be inclusive of the 90% also. And changing the way girls look, dress, behave, just not to make the "have not" guys shocked, doesn’t solve the problem. There is no end to it. For a man who has bad intentions, irrespective of the fact whether they come from village, are not accustomed to see city girls or whatever, clothes and all are external factors and there can be thousands more. These cannot be controlled. What can be controlled is improving the framework of security, judicial system and providing a better atmosphere at home, better and sensible education.