Women and Religious Persecution

The concept of the "Pure Woman" in the religious and larger socio-political context irks me to the core. Back in 2019, a young policeman came up to me while I was busy talking to my best friend (a 20 year old boy at that time), and told me how he viewed each woman in India as a Devi, and how Devi's' weren't supposed to wear hot shorts and speak to men one-on-one publicly. The fact that I screamed my lungs out at his moral policing is secondary, but imagine the rage that brought that about!! I did not ask to be a Devi, I don't want to be one EVER; if even a godly female force doesn't have the right to exercise her freedom in a free country like India.

Allow me take you on an acid trip of female persecution, and then I will state its relevance-

STOP 1:

Iran's parliament has recently passed a controversial bill that would increase prison terms and fines for women and girls who break its strict dress code. Those dressed "inappropriately" face up to 10 years in jail under the bill, for which a three-year "trial" was agreed. It still needs to be approved by the Guardian Council to become law. Under Iranian law, which is based on the COUNTRY'S INTERPRETATION of Sharia, women and girls above the age of puberty must cover their hair with a hijab and wear long, loose-fitting clothing to DISGUISE THEIR FIGURES. (BBC News)

The proposed legislation will now undergo a review process by the Guardian Council, a conservative assembly of "religious scholars" and legal experts.

In earlier discussions this month, a group of eight independent human rights experts from the United Nations cautioned that the bill could be characterized as a type of gender-based segregation, as it seems that authorities are governing through systematic discrimination with the objective of suppressing women and girls, compelling them to complete submission; infringing upon their fundamental rights, such as the right to participate in cultural activities, the prohibition of gender-based discrimination, freedom of thought and expression, the right to engage in peaceful protests, the right to access social, educational, and healthcare services, and the freedom of movement.

STOP 2:

This one might seem pretty insignificant to people who lack coherence of gender-based violence and how "small" events even show the violent patriarchal mindset of the rising saffron brigade in India, but I don't really care about your uneducated viewpoints, because I am livid with rage everyday when it comes to brainwashed saffron men and their audacity.

Actress and Model, Disha Patani was shamed for wearing a saree with a balconette blouse, because her bosom and midriff were visible, and more importantly, she wore so at Ganapati Utsav party. The saffron men claimed it was shameful/vulgar to dress that way in front of a deity. The who**-ification of women who don't dress "modestly" by the saffron brigade and their constant hyper-sexualization (rising from illiteracy, religious bigotry, misogyny, archaic beliefs) of the atheist/Muslim/Dalit/non-religious Hindu/even the Hindu women is appalling; and often leads to gender-based sexual dominance (rape, eve-teasing, molestation, unwarranted comments) and economic dominance to wield power over the so-called weaker gender.

A lot has been written about the prime points of conflict between Hindutva icon V.D Savarkar and Mahatma Gandhi – the source of violence in India’s struggle for independence from the British and the fate of Muslims. For Savarkar, who many believe was also involved in the plotting of Gandhi’s assassination, the slogan was to “Hinduise all politics and militarise all Hindudom”. This ideology was, to a large part, a response to Gandhi’s idea of Ahimsa (what Savarkar labelled excessive non-violence) and policy of appeasing Muslims. But Gandhi and Savarkar disagreed on another key and interrelated issue – masculinisation as an act of nation-building. Savarkar believed that Gandhi’s nonviolent way, and appeasement of minorities, was emasculating the nation and, instead, preached military prowess and sexual potency in Hindu men. Savarkar argued that forced conversion and systematic rape are two main ways in which Muslims increase their numbers, and rebuked Hindus for their “suicidal idea of Hindu chivalry”. In effect, the rebuke was a call for Hindu men to prove their masculinity by raping Muslim women and vindicating the honour of Hindu women – legitimising rape as a weapon of war. (NewsClick) The apathy towards the Hathras victim, the questioning of the morality of the Delhi victim, the foreign trips and photo-ops while a woman in Manipur was raped and the act filmed and circulated, the list goes on...

STOP 3:

There are Bible passages in Paul's letters that reinforce the notion of women having a distinct or submissive role in relation to men. For instance, one such passage reads: "A woman should acquire knowledge in a calm and submissive manner. I do not allow a woman to instruct or take authority over a man; she should maintain a tranquil demeanor. After all, Adam was created before Eve." God-fearing Christians lurking on Instagram leave no stones unturned to strip women off their right to freedom, sexuality and force upon them submissive-ness and the messed up concept of being a pure woman.

If you are someone who keeps up with popular culture, recently an extremely successful white single mother of a young boy was criticized heavily for hugging her son after he won a match. Her fault? She looks way too young for her age, and dresses "provocatively" (LOL). Her personal Instagram was filled with comments of how she must be gaining sexual gratification from her son and how she is the perfect example of an immoral, vulgar woman who just cannot be pinned down (leading to her single motherhood); all by WOMEN WHO STRICTLY ABIDE BY THE BIBLE.

The concept of women’s body as a substitute for male honour is so massive, that they become targets of sexual violence easily to SET AN EXAMPLE. The male feelings of shame of loss and control is linked to the control of female behaviour, and enforced by hyper-religious, non-progressive codes of conduct.

To use religion and faith to subvert women is not new, but also VERY VERY irrelevant to the modern world. What's relevant is; taking your shame because your hyper masculinity stinks and brings you no attention until you exercise your physical dominance on a woman or leave a disgusting comment under a woman's picture that showcases nothing but your poor upbringing; to your grave.