Secular Love and Communal Murder
The
Hindu Right wing on social media is hysterically bashing everyone who
has called the 23-year-old Ankit Saxena’s brutal murder “honor” killing
or what I described as an outcome of patriarchal oppression. Even if one
is independently in agreement with some of their conclusions, that is
not enough for them. They want everyone to completely submit to their
outlook and approach — abusive vocabulary, black and white narrative,
shrill chest-thumping, tunnel vision, with little or no education.
But
as I have said before, in the context of the Left-leaning hate-Hindu
Right Wing brigade, I refuse to be part of the clown club. I refuse to
be part of the Hindu unschooled league too.
You
may think that I am being arrogant and pompous here but you can’t shame
me for working hard in life to educate myself, for overcoming handicaps
and baggage of my history, for fulfilling my responsibilities as a
conscientious citizen and for being a dispassionate journalist. I am not
your next door literate buffoon or fashionably literate pseudo-secular.
You can’t cower me into silence by sending armies of bigoted bozos
after me on social media. I am neither afraid of rats and cheerleaders
of Humans of Hindutva (HOH) nor your IT cell creeps and sissies.
Back
to the main subject of this post. Only dimwits would find inconsistency
in what I have said earlier and what I am saying now about the Ankit
Saxena murder. I do not and I have not denied Ankit Saxena’s brutal
murder is a hate crime and religious bigotry. I do NOT trivialise
communal violence ever. I was very specific in mentioning “community”,
which is very distinct from caste and class, in my earlier post.
But
can we overlook that women’s right to love or marry, is denied by
patriarchy using instruments of caste or class or religion? Men are its
victims too and it is true for all inter-faith/caste/class marriages
which lead to violence. If the girl’s family had been “upper” caste
Hindu and killed the boy, as does happen in Haryana, most people would
call it “honor” killing. Of course, there is no “honor” there and that
is why the word remains in quotes because it is perceived honor
(misplaced really) of patriarchal families. So, in Haryana, it is often
caste patriarchy. Ankit Saxena’s killing is communal patriarchy.
Patriarchy, nevertheless. Ankit was a victim of NOT caste or class
divide but of communal violence, driven by patriarchy.
Now,
are Muslim societies more patriarchal than other communities? Of
course, yes. Are Muslim women more oppressed than women from other
communities? Again, yes. Does this have anything to do with religion?
Absolutely yes. Women in India, Hindu or Muslim or of any other
denomination are not prohibited from marrying men of their choice by
Indian law. Muslim women are prohibited by their religious code and
Hindu women are prohibited by a societal and caste code.
Hindu women are prohibited by a societal and caste code.
Religious
code, of course, is far more severe because, as a male Hindu friend
always complained, there is no level-playing field for love and
courtship when it comes to Muslim women. Islamic law erects so many
barriers starting from veil to the precondition of conversion for
marriage and then to the religious sanction to kill the ‘infidel’, that
Muslim women remain inaccessible to non-Muslim men for love and
companionship. But if you think harder about this, these walls around
Muslim women are created by patriarchy, using the instrument of Islamic
law.
It
has been distressing to see the pictures of Ankit Saxena before and
after his barbaric murder and read the account of his bereaved girl
friend. It is just heartbreaking to read about the loss of his grieving
parents. What a price to pay for love across religious lines! Hope his
girl friend who is testifying against her parents, gets to live and
fight for her rights.
That
said, you are lying if you do not recognize that not only religious
code but societal codes are also prevalent today (perhaps as a reaction
to each other?) and both are dictated by men. Khap panchayats and
moulvis do not have radically opposing views when it comes to women’s
right to love and marry. Women become complicit in enforcing these codes
too since it is still a man’s world. I don’t hate men but I do think
women deserve equal fundamental rights even as they are different from
men in some ways.
In
the end, do think about this bit. Ankit’s father said, “People were
busy taking his photos instead of helping him.” His mother said, “20–30
people gathered around us were clicking videos while I was calling for
help.” That’s a telling comment about India and we Indians. Shame!
Aarti Tikoo Singh
An
Editor. In Love With Hard-Nosed Political Theory; Lachrymose
Literature; Grey Ideas; Rainbow Words; Rugged Mountains; Gushing Rivers.
Of Paradoxical Life.
