All of these of course have implications for women, especially for urban, affluent women who are in some ways what the Hindutva brigade would most like to control. Attacks on such women are more visible in the media, giving the attackers more publicity. You rarely catch the fundamentalist groups lecturing women in slums on how they should behave – indeed, it is not uncommon to see women from lower income groups casually smoking bidis, something an upper-class woman would think twice before doing on the street. In a sense, the Hindutva brigade would like the upper-class woman to stick to their templatised version of the Bharatiya nari – for this is the woman who is to ’set an example’. Wealth is aspirational, and if one can bind wealth into a straitjacket, so much the better. Not that fundamentalists may reason out strategy in this fashion, but instinctively, they know whom to target.
I do not really agree with her post but she does raised some interesting points. Just because violence on a certain section of women does not get media attention does not mean that it does not happen nor does it mean it is not part of the right wing agenda to suppress women. To assume that only affluent, upper class women are the target of right-wing violence is specious. But I do agree with her last sentence:
Linked by madhat. Join Blogbharti facebook group.Ultimately, the desire for power and a world-view which sees violence as a valid option is, and the sooner we recognise that, the better.
Madhat, thanks for linking. Just to clarify – sorry if I have given the impression that violence is restricted to upper class women. It isn’t at all and that is not at all what I mean to say. What I wanted to say is that, when it comes to setting an “ideal”, the right actually prefers upper class women in a sense – since they are seen as better “examples” – this is of course also a casteist mindset at work, which sees poor off women as in any case corrupted.
Apu, fair enough.
I do not think they are trying to set an ‘ideal’. They are attacking women who are just a bit more empowered than the rest. It is an expression of power, as you point out.
Babri Masjid demolition…..Gujarat Massacre…..Why NOT Tejo Mahalaya next?.
The time has come for Indian Muslims to kick out the ghost of 1947, prove their patriotism and disengage Pakistan in one master stroke:
Ample historic evidence proves that Taj Mahal was originally called as Tejo Mahalaya, a palace temple of Lord Shiva.
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm
Narendra Modi likes to call Muslims “Babur ke aulad – Children of Babur”. Let him get his facts right. More than 60% of Indian Muslims are Shudra converts who renounced Hinduism to escape the caste based discrimination and suppression. The rest are from other high castes. Who is Babur ke aulad?. Look at Taj Mahal. Shahjehan is the true Babur ke aulad. Majority Hindus think that Taj Mahal is a Muslim holy shrine. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In fact, this is an unIslamic structure. Shahjehan constructed a Mosque like structure on the cemetry of his wife and worshipped (ibadad) her for the rest of his life, ignoring the duty and welfare for his citizens. This is “shirq” in Islam. A simple Mosque in a Muslim “mohallah” is much more dearer for us than Taj Mahal, which has got nothing to do with our faith Islam.
Babri Masjid demolition and Gujarat massacre shook the Muslim masses from their sound slumber and today we can see steep growth in educated Muslims who have started making their mark in all walks of life. Thanks. Tejo Mahalaya will push them out of their “Lakshman Rekha” and pave the way for PM/CMs.
To win the trust and confidence of 800 million Hindus, 250 million Muslims should demand for the restoration of original Tejo Mahalaya. It’s high time to kick out the ghost of Babur and 1947 partition.