The fuss that has been going in the country since
the release of “India’s Daughter” surpasses the controversy that Indian cinema
has caused till date. Some years back the Hollywood film, Slumdog Millionaire,
had created quite a stir among the Indian audiences. The reasons behind the
stir in both of these cases remain confusing. In the case of Slumdog millionaire
people saw the movie as a move to show India in bad light while ‘India’s
daughter’ documentary is being seen as the thoughts of every ‘male’ citizen of
India only voiced by Mukesh Singh and the lawyers. But is it true? Has the
movie really been made to show the world that Indian men think woman only to
fulfil their sexual needs?
On December 16, 2013 a para-medical student was
brutally gang raped while her friend was beaten. This rape sparked the anger
that had been boiling since years in the hearts of all Indian women. From the
very next day of this gruesome rape incident, people of every sex - who never
met each other in any social networking group or otherwise - unitedly came up
on streets voicing against a common agenda.
Be it college students, working women or housewives,
thousands of protesters poured onto the streets like never before to protest
against the failure of state and central government to provide adequate
security to women. This rage that Indian documentary-makers should have
immediately taken up as their next topic was instead taken up by a British
film-maker. So another question arises – is the debate that’s going on is
because a foreign film-maker has taken up?
Everyday a minimum of two or three stories of rape
comes up in newspaper while ten go undiscovered. Be it a girl of 5 year old or
a lady of 50 year old; girl wearing jeans or lady wearing sari no one is barred
from the thoughts of rapists. In an interview of Leslee Udwin, the author of
this simple documentary film says it was not the horror of the rape but the
extraordinary eruption on the streets for over a month that inspired her to
make the film. The unprecedented number of ordinary men and women, day after
day, faced a ferocious government crackdown that included teargas, baton
charges and water cannon.
On
the name “India’s Daughter”, she comments “Yes, but Nirbhaya was called India's Daughter by the press
here, and we are not allowed to name her in India. Abroad, we are naming her
because her father released her name and her name is in Wikipedia. But we could
not call it by her name here. And we could not call it just Nirbhaya because
what would an international audience have made of that? They cannot even
pronounce it, let alone what it means.
She says “This is a global problem
because every society is sick with patriarchy. Of course, that is a major
problem here, but also the world over. There is a patriarchal culture all over
the world, and that is what we want to show.”
Talking of the documentary, in one way it brought
with itself the deep psychology of some percentage of men who rushed to defend
themselves. One such case is the release of ‘United Kingdom’s Daughter’ by
video-maker, Harvinder Singh in response to the documentary to show how sexual
violence is a universal problem and not unique to India. The men who call
themselves educated and modern could not see the movie what sick mentality the
rapists and their defence lawyers had been breeding. Well the rapists are
uneducated but what about the lawyers.
One of the rapists' defence
attorneys, M.L. Sharma, had said “You are talking of friend as a man and
woman….sorry that doesn’t have any place in our society. We have the best
culture. In our culture there is no place for a woman. A woman means I
immediately put the sex in his eyes.”
The other defence lawyer, A.P. Singh without any hesitation even added,
"If my daughter or sister engaged in premarital activities and disgraced
herself and allowed herself to lose face and character by doing such things, I
would most certainly take this sort of sister or daughter to my farmhouse, and
in front of my entire family, I would put petrol on her and set her
alight."
The rapist—Mukesh Singh—told Udwin that while Jyoti was
"being raped, she shouldn't fight back. She should just be silent and
allow the rape. Then they'd have dropped her off after 'doing her,' and only
hit the boy. ... A decent girl won't roam around at nine o'clock at night. …
Housework and housekeeping is for girls, not roaming in discos and bars at
night doing wrong things, wearing wrong clothes."
In an interview of Udwin, she says the motive of
mentioning the views of the rapists an especially the lawyers were bot voicing
their opinions but the opinions of the society. They were talking about aspects
of a society and women in a particular way. She says, “They are not just saying 'she was out on the streets at a particular
time, she was asking for it'. They are saying 'a woman is a flower, a man is
thorn. A woman needs protection'."
While pondering on the pshychology
of these people there is also a video of teacher of Jyoti Singh, Satendra who
also is a male. What he says is completely opposite. He has put forward
questions like - What was the crime of Jyoti? That she went out at night? Is it
a crime to go out for a movie with a friend?
Again it was a male who despite the
ban on this movie by the government took up the challenge to educate more and
more women the psych of those rapists. Ketan Dixit an activist did not fear the
jail and went on to show the movie to the people of the Ravidas camp where
those rapists lived. He received immense response though he is saddened of the
fact that the families of those rapists were not present at that moment. Now,
it is another male Raghul Sudeesh, a lawyer who has filed a petition with two
lakh signatures to the Bar Council to debar M.L. Sharma and A.P.Singh. Recently,
while these two lawyers have sought a chance to let them voice their apology
and correct their statements, the women lawyers have demanded barring of A.P
Singh and M.L Sharma from Supreme Court.
Dr Maria Misra, writer and
historian in Oxford university Keble College, comments that the idea of the
gang rape was to send a message that woman are not to breach the boundary
between men and woman to do with power. Even Dr Sandip Govil, jail psychiatrist
of the rapists, says that there the main mental set-up is “It’s our right. We
are in enjoyment mode….”
Here again my question gets
repeated does the movie intend to show that maximum Indian men are all same and
share the same mentality as those of the lawyers and rapists. Danny Cohen, BBC
Director of Television in an interview had said "The purpose of including
the interview with the perpetrator was to gain an insight into the mind-set of
a rapist with a view to understanding the wider problem of rape and not just in
India."
After the movie was banned by the
Indian government, Leslee Udwin said, “India's Daughter was
always designed to unleash a campaign that has global objectives. We must be
keenly aware that all of us the world over … we all must hang our heads in
shame until we correct this imbalance."
