I’ve
recently come back from a trip to India.
As would be expected, they have totally different points of reference
when it comes to societal codes.
On the one
hand, living of life that we keep behind closed doors or in back yards, they
live out in the open, before anyone’s eyes to see: washing clothes, combing
hair, feeding children, napping… For a
Westerner, it’s rare to glimpse what is usually private, intimate… and left me
with a rather friendly invitation to focusing on our common humanity and daily
lives.
On the
other hand, the sexual and the sensual so ostentatiously flaunted in the West
are, in India, more latent and discreet.
This got me
to thinking about the society I would like to build, the one I would like to
welcome my children; I got to thinking about what constitutes progress and how
it comes about.
Oftentimes,
countries that are emerging have the luxury of adopting the technological
advances of the first world countries, then improving upon them thanks to a
combination of their own vision and the benefit of others’ learning
curves. Instead of following the same
slow curve of progress as the initiators, these countries can jump start at the
heights where others’ progress has reached.
For example, despite widespread poverty, nearly 74% of India’s
population (over 880 million), own mobile phones (http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column_why-india-has-more-cell-phones-than-toilets_1655351) and enjoy stunningly low rates for communications compared to many first
world countries.
But does
this same “progress curve” rule apply to social and societal advancement?
Looking
around some parts of India, I witnessed this:
But what
did I discover on the cover of the Indian publication of GQ?
This is
practically racier and more extreme than Western standards, which are already
in great need of revision.
What I find
disturbing is for “progress” and, I suppose, “freedom” to have the face of
images that are so deprecating for women.
Should modernity be represented by visuals that suggest a woman’s main
value amounts to her surgically enhanced breasts? Is this what we should be aiming for? Should we allow a great international media
machine to pull countries with much potential and richness to slip into
anti-progressive attitudes for women as a sign of advancement compared to
traditional attitudes?
Is it
progress for one’s body to be a commodity?
Is it progress for the person to be reduced to a sexual object? I don’t mean to imply that beautiful women
can’t represent anything other than sex.
But I do mean to imply that every time we mainstream and focalize on
pornography (which used to have a reserved time, place, and function), we
sideline the other hard-won aspects of woman-become-subject (vs. the “object”
Simone de Beauvoir so aptly identified at the beginning of the 20th century). This ostentation also raises the pressure on
overly busy women trying to “have it all” to unreasonable standards of
Monotheistic Beauty & body in the seduction game, as well as feeds
unreasonable expectations in terms of our sexual performance (as opposed to
sexual fulfillment)…
The more
extreme this ostentation becomes, the harder becomes the backlash of who reject
such extremes. Take, for example, the
resurgence of French women choosing to veil themselves. For some, it is a means to reject this
sex-centeredness. For others, it’s a
means of survival in their environment (the creation of the group called “ni putes ni soumises” in 2003 brought attention to the
regressive choice for young French women living in the “cités” to dress in
bulky sweat suits or veil themselves to avoid being cast as a hoar and become
an easy target for slander or even rape / gang rape). Another example is the adoption of “women’s
only” space on public trains and subways in India to help protect women from
unwanted staring, fondling, or worse.
But, in a
modernized and/or modernizing world, surely we needn’t resort to veils or
segregation to shield ourselves from an unhealthy objectivizing gaze?
Artist
Shreyas Karle collecting data for the “closed space fantasy meditation” and
studying “camouflage to get around censorship”
I usually
balk at these types of innovations because, for me, men should learn to control
themselves and change their gaze rather than forcing women to cover
themselves. There is no reason for
making the woman simultaneously the victim and the one to pay amends while the
actual perpetrators are shielded from any responsibility.
After all,
is progress about makeshift protection or about reevaluating the rights and
obligations of each empowered member of a society?
But for
this, we need to get collectively clearer on exactly what “empowered” entails
in a progressive society. I have already
voiced my opinion on this subject, but India’s hesitation between the
dynamic progress of human industry and superficial Western codes of sexual
liberation has helped me realize other adjacent issues to be addressed and
unintended consequences to measure:
·
Where
is our frontier for intimacy? There was
an article a year or 2 ago about young women getting piercings in the vicinity
of their pubis to reassure themselves there were still some parts of their
bodies seen by a select few. We exhibit
more and more of ourselves, enabled by social media to spill out all of our
private lives over the world wide web… creating a greater need for
exhibitionism and approbation… and in turn leading us to build our sense of
self and worth only through the other’s gaze.
Intimacy is a means for reclaiming our own prerogatives and
preferences. But when it is eroded, our
defenses and confidence erode as well.
To give a concrete example, check out the youtube “am I pretty?” in
which young women, even young girls, ask the internet to rate their beauty.
They are clearly tying up their self concept to others’ gazes while
diminuing their intimacy and personal territory.
·
Where
may we safeguard a harbor for desire?
For longing? Love and lust are
increasingly commoditized and beholden to our consumerist expectations of
instant gratification whereas the bylaws of more lasting and fulfilling
relationships seem to build according to a slower dance. We should start giving the market of love a
little more substance and a little less “eye candy”. But as long as love is misused as a way of
confirming our self-worth and societal acceptance (like in the “am I pretty?”
videos) instead of self-discovery and growth, we will be demeaning one of the
world’s most important renewable resources and sources of hope and welfare.
·
What
is our responsibility for protecting our children and How far can we allow
media to go with its soft to hard porn without it creating new social norms
that cross a serious (albeit unintended) line of fostering children’s sexual
exploitation (cf. The See Hear Speak Campaign)?
These are
the kinds of questions no one wants to consider for fear of taking away
liberties. But the other day, when I was
walking in the street in a Parisian suburb with a dress whose skirt flowed just
above the knee, I felt quite uncomfortable and isolated as young men made
suggestive remarks and the other women nearby were veiled. Could it be that if we toned down ever so
slightly our race to sex-centeredness, we could preserve our right to dress
lightly in full confidence? It’s time
for us to establish our own conditions on these questions before we find
ourselves all locked-in a bind, far from the real liberty and progress we’re
seeking to preserve.
Let me know what you think.
Talk to you next week for another bite from the apple,
Eve
No comments:
Post a Comment