I was in my FY B.A. when I met Nandini. Nandini was staying near Ganga
Jamuna basti. None of our friends were ready to go with her to her
house. When I visited her house first time, it was an afternoon. There
was laziness in the air. Shops were closed for lunch hour. I entered
the lane; the morning had just started for the basti, in the afternoon
and women were washing clothes, cleaning vessels, brushing teeth,
giving wash to their children. Basti has just awakened and a nice
spicy food smell also was in the air. We crossed the lane. The
scenario changed; there was a temple of Shiva. Nandini's father was a
priest of that temple. After his death her mother with two daughters
were staying in the temple's premises as a caretakers.
Nandini was like Sharadchandra's heroine was always in saree, palloo
on both shoulders. Now I can understand that she wanted to show her
chastity through her dress code. Staying in that house was not
avoidable, but maintaining image and demarcation line was a must for
her to show her pure morals. Visiting her house was taboo and
practiced by our puritanical friends. When I was returning from her
house in the late evening, the Basti was looking like a new bride,
colors everywhere, the lane was full of crowds, smell of perfumes,
gajaras and women in petticoats and blouses without sarees, were
standing outside. The shops were open. But I was totally scared;
Nandini's mother scolded us, asking me to stay that night. I could not
convey a message to my parents, phones were not available like today.
Her mother asked one male neighbor to leave me at the other end of the
lane. My protector scared me more than the men on the street. I was
sweating and nervous. But could not understand that why these women
were bad? I tried to ask my mother, mother was angry that I saw the
area. There was no dialogue. The impression became fixed in my
subconscious that young girls should not enter this area - any one can
kidnap them or going to such area is very bad. But teen aged me was
asking myself the reasons why I would fear Nandini's white collared
neighbour more than the other men and women in that Galli.
That was my first introduction to the prostitutes' neighborhood. Ganga
Jamuna referred to the red-light area in Nagpur, a name was given to
keep their identity different from other society. (10 yrs. Later I
found the proper word, added in my dictionary was ghettoization.) And
when I came to Mumbai, Pune, I realized that everywhere this ghetto
basti is connected to the Bazaar road. The other so called good
business are always nearby, the people who visit the Bazaar at night
can just cross the road or the sex worker can stand on these roads.
Same path is for all, but at night the picture changes all roads go to
the red light area. But still the area is ghettoized. The sex work was
connected to all business roads, now I can understand that why they
were calling it 'vyavsaya'. (These are my learning's in the
process.)
It was TY B.A. when I got fully involved in women's movement. It was
1978. Started taking part in actions against atrocities on women like
dowry death and rape. I was stigmatized as a home breaker.
Simultaneously organizing students and youth, as an activist of Chatra
Yuva Sangharsh Vahini. I was introduced to many likeminded boys and
girls. Obviously, my life was different from other traditional girls.
I started talking about sexuality, right to one's own body, right to
decision making. Of course, the conflicts were waiting. My generation
was talking about women's liberation. The conflicts were within me and
with society. The issues were multiple relationship, living
relationship, Natural guardianship to mother, contraception, right to
abortion, having friendship with boys before marriage and after
marriage, why marriage symbols only for women etc. All were related to
sexuality directly or indirectly. The words like rand, veshya,
bazarbasvi and Badfaili, were used to abuse women who were widows or
for women having conversations with `outsiders`, men in society, in
literature. Those were common everywhere. I have heard this from
childhood. When I started working in the social field, it was quite
difficult for me to understand that in a respected field like social
and political activism why there was character assassination? I was
just 20 yrs old; my questions when articulated were treated as
`generation gap'. I got married and it was by my choice, first time I
realized and experienced the solidarity of castism and patriarchy. I
was discriminated being OBC. My own experiences told me that you could
change class but not caste. In my experience, mostly people's class
depends on their castes. The lifetime struggles of Jyotiba Phule,
Savitri Phule, Tarabai Shinde, Fatima Sheikh, Shahu Maharaj, Periyar
and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar against the caste system have deeply
influenced my way of thinking. Their work helped us get our
constitutional rights. We could see many changes in the so-called
lower castes and in women belonging to all castes, who started getting
education and started changing their economic status. But a poor
Brahmin was always in a higher position than an upper class lower
caste person. Poverty could not snatch their dignity and right to
livelihood like other people who were very poor. Similarly, some women
from prostitution have changed their class, but still their status is
according to their work and castes.
My confusions
But when I started listening to experiences of Devdasis and their role
in negotiation with other upper castes land lords, I got a new
version, the first hand experience to look into caste, class and
gender.
I am very much influenced by Phule, Ambedkar's ideology. Non-Brahmin
feminism taught me to resist prostitution, as it is an exploitation of
Dalit women. We believed that most of the women in prostitution are
from lower castes and Brahmanism gave sanction to feudal structure to
use lower caste women sexually. The tradition like Devdasi is a
degradation of women from lower castes. The superstition helps to keep
them in this custom. I thus became a part of the eradication of
superstition. In which the rehabilitation of Devdasi system was a
major program. We started making fun of the system by singing songs
like chappal tutali yellamma, but the songs on Brahmin superstitions
were very few, not questioning satyanarayan or any god like Ganapati.
On face level the exploitation and atrocities on prostitutes was
creating sympathy, so working for their children and rescue from the
dirt, was the position of uplifting them mainstream casts based
society. It was contradictory to my ideology of revolution
We said that all women are equal and homogeneous in the women's
movement even though they are Dalits, OBC, Muslim and all minorities,
Tribal, Brahmins etc. My feminism and socialism merged together. My
activism, research and ideology gave me a certain perspective. It was
reflected through slogans, actions and other writings. " Nari bhi
zinda insan nahi bhog ka vah saman", we resisted songs like "Tu cheez
badi hai mast, mast", we were protesting beauty contests and
simultaneously we were asking for the right to work at night in any
sector. We were saying that women in prostitution also have a right to
say no. She also has rights and without her consent any physical
contact or intercourse means rape. We were saying that she is also a
human being. But our approach was that `women are victims of society
and it's cultural values' approach.
But my socialist background taught that prostitutes are social evils
(impact of Gandhian and Ambedkariyan ideology) or women in the immoral
sector. The understanding was that women in prostitution are mostly
cheated, forced and compelled for flesh marketing. Most of us were
influenced by Gurudutt's Pyasa's song, written by Sahir 'Aurat ne
janam diya mardonko'. Mard is using aurat for bazaar, was quite clear.
Socialist feminists definition of patriarchy's role in prostitution
was very much convincing, very much moral and puritan as well as
influenced by radical feminists position too that women in
prostitution are exploited by men. When I started working with SANGRAM
and VAMP, my being feminist became a hurdle to accept their position.
But my subconscious and my open-minded attitude helped me not to
fanatically stick with isms. But my middleclass values are shattering
everyday; from the time I started listening to the positions and
voices of sex workers in VAMP, during my recent association with their
work from Oct.2006.
There was a pre Beijing conference in Banglore in 1995. In the plenary
for the first time SANGRAM and VAMP dropped a bomb by stating " We
trade our sex like you trade your intelligence. We would like to call
ourselves sex workers, not prostitutes." Most of the feminists
gathered were in shock. I was also amazed but very much interested to
understand VAMPS position. I remembered that I was discussing with
Meena, Durga, Shabana and other friends in VAMP the whole night. But
in the conference some of us protested against this position, some of
us were confused and some of us were disturbed. One voice was common
in the conference - how could prostitution be sex work? How could they
compare it with our intellectual work? It was quite difficult to
understand that time. My moral values were shaken. Today also it is
difficult to understand. But the reluctance for the discussion is over
now; the space is created in the society, credit for this goes to the
young generation because they speak quite openly on issues like
sexuality. Organized sex workers are putting forward their views in
the media and the young generation is listening to them and is not
biased by any isms like us.
In the beginning giving challenges and breaking new paths
became a form of rebellion and of course it is difficult to swallow
this type of rebellion from prostitutes. 1995 to 2006 the terminology,
the positions, the approach seems to be changed or a new process of
understanding has started. I think work on the HIV/AIDS epidemic has
contributed a lot to change the scenario. Sexuality issues have
entered the mainstream public education system and public health
discussions have adapted to give sex education a wide acceptance. You
can see the changes that the young generation is quite openly talking
about sex and sexuality. Media played a remarkable role; they
organized open talk shows about the HIV epidemic, sex workers, MSM,
Hijras etc. New generation is not talking only about feminism or human
rights, but they are talking about right to choice of sexual partners.
Cultural Morality is not only the contract of fundamentalists, the
left paradigm also believes in this. We can see feminists on beauty
contest, pornography, body exhibition, homosexuality; multiple sexes
etc took the positions. BJP or Muslim League take actions for Dress
Code, tearing or blackening the 'porn ' posters, and demand to censor
films like Fire. We also protested against beauty contests, Mallika
Sheravat's murder etc blackened the pornographic posters. The new
generation kept showing us that our arguments put us on the same side
where the rightists are. They say that you just leave the choice to
people, why you people have taken contract to correct every one. And
if you are correcting then take the responsibility to follow the
values and virtues you talk about. Why there is a hidden hypocrisy and
duel moral?
Most of the progressives in their own life for themselves are so
generous, to give excuses when their own family members do wrongs
according to their definitions, it does not become a social or
political question it becomes individual choice and they get the
advantage of being elite. The critique of the younger generation asked
me to look into this.
Still Vamp's position is quite shocking for the generation above 50 in
activism. We could see the reactions in WSF and ISF Delhi. Activists
and social workers working on other issues were very suspicious of
activists who were from the HIV/AIDS world or those related to the
Rainbow Planet. Activists from people's movement could not understand
that how sexuality can become important issue for someone when the
struggle is going for livelihood and dignity? (Astitva aur Asmita ki
ladai). When I met VAMP activists I started thinking about so many
things. Here I am giving my thought process, the genuine questions
that I asked myself. Why I am disturbed? Is it because of my moral
standard or is it because my political or social background or is it
my upbringing or is it my feminist position or is it society's
pressure, or is pressure from my comrade's position in people's
movement? I think it is overall impact. It seems too complicated.
Reasons must be too many, but the truth could not be denied that I was
disturbed. I would like to cote some incidents.
In one camp one sex worker was narrating her story- 'my daughter got
married, we had a huge function, but within a month she came back. She
was humiliated because of her mother's profession. She had respect for
me and other women in this profession. She could not tolerate and came
back. She has chosen this profession only.''
'' When I ask customer to use condom and negotiate with him that
without condom I will not sleep., He has to agree. But it is different
about Malak or husband, he does not listen, he feels insulted. He
feels right on wife's sexuality, negotiation becomes fruitless. And I
became HIV positive because I was forced to believe in him as Malak he
would not cheat me. I could not understand where I was safe - in my
profession or in family?''
'' Why there is respect when everything is in hidden form? Our Basti
is always targeted by so called 'moral correct people like police
(smiles), social institutes. They raid in our community and pick up
our young girls children, they think that prostitute does not produce
the children; all the children in the community are because of
trafficking. But because of our organization we do not allow minor
girls in the profession. We think that it is her choice after 18 yrs
old to choose the profession."
Listening to these sex workers experiences gave me sleepless nights. I
was comparing the practices like child marriages, which are banned
legally. But even though everyone knows the child marriage is not
stopped or raided. When the Bhavaridevi rape took place five Rajput
who raped her got free in Supreme Court. Moral supremacy is to protect
rapist, protect the people for child marriage but not them who are
actual victims. In marriage I think sexual relationship is included!
Then why such marriages are not stopped and why not major actions by
police and state are not taken. Everywhere sexual transactions with
minors should be stopped. But not callously. Just you see the minors
in sex workers community you think they are for the prostitution. I
think the proper investigations; the dialogue with the community and
even proper scrutiny is needed. An action like raid is threatening,
raids are supposed to be conducted for rescue. But the attitude behind
these raids is of hunting the wild animals. Even about child labor,
they are caught not rescued and caught in the factories not in the
houses from middleclass. I was certainly getting what sex worker women
were narrating. I was convinced that the negotiation in their work is
possible but in family it is difficult with male members. But my
position was not allowing me to accept that above 18 one can have a
choice to be a sex worker. Still I am confused. I know I will not
allow my daughter to choose this profession. But I will not ask her to
be a sweeper too. I was restless and here I kept my earlier positions
besides. My process started to think without prejudices.
I found that the people from below poverty do not stop their normal
life, sexual life; they need bread and roses together like others. But
the social and political people think about them only in relation to
poverty not as a human living.
Therefore there is a lot of confusion. It gave a birth to a
discussion that 'exchanging manual labor in any trade is ethical and
by choice but exchanging sex for money is unethical and a compulsion
of poverty, not by own choice.' I think in both situations there is
compulsion, there is degradation, there is stigma, but people
consider cleaning toilets, picking manure or sweeping as more
dignified than sex work. What is the basis of this thinking? Is it
moral? Just because of middleclass moral values and status symbols
society makes to believe in?
When Meena Seshu from SANGRAM goes further from position of sex work
to Sex for livelihood I know it becomes quite explosive and confusing
for me an activist working for right to livelihood in environment
movement. Then I become restless, I realize that because we are still
stuck in shaping definitions and understanding the issues through
women in sex profession. It needs a long and deep discourse by the
movement's activists, ideologue and sex workers themselves. After lot
of thinking I come to the conclusion that it is the right time to take
position to define whether it is traditional profession, or sex
business or sex for livelihood or sex work. Because the struggle of
sex workers in India is now quite vocal, visible and can not leave us
without asking about our positions, they do not want sympathy, but
solidarity. If we take the position of what Meena Seshu is
suggesting, that sex work should be considered as sex for livelihood,
what will be the benefits for them? Here is my viewpoint on this
position that they could become a part of Kashtakari (labours)
struggle, while their labor is not included in labor paradigm. I think
we can demand to include sex professionals under the Social security
act. Social Security act talks about all the labor working for
livelihood in different sectors from tribes, nomadic tribes, artisans,
agro industry, peasants, self-employed work e.g. rag picking, Coolies,
domestic work, boot polish etc. It demands security in old age,
pension, gratuity, and compensation for any casualty, accident or
harassment at work place. I think we should introduce Social Security
Act to people in sex profession and take their opinion. They will be
part of global struggle to sustain their livelihood, resources and
preserve their own cultural diversity. All these points should be
discussed with sex workers and then whatever position they take we
have to take, not for our political correctness in 2007.
Lata Pratibha Madhukar is a human rights activist and a writer and
currently is associated with National Centre foe Advocacy Studies
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
