What? Marry a non-virgin?
You don`t say!
Darius Nakhoonwala
Wow! This must be a record of sorts. All major newspapers got it wrong last week. Leader writers love intellectualizing simple issues but even they ought to have seen what the real issue is in the Khushboo-Suhasini affair.
Simply put, men want their wives to be virgins. So if someone says pre-marital sex is ok, the poor chaps get flustered. Someone might ask them though if the deal is reciprocal. True, not many Indian men manage to have pre-marital sex. But it is still worth asking the question.
The Hindu announced indignantly "the harassment and unseemly protests against opinions expressed by Kushboo and Suhasini Maniratnam… demonstrate a disquieting tendency to shut out free speech that no democratic society can countenance." Oh, would I that the Hindu would publish a pro-US article on Iran or Iraq.
It went on to expand the ambit of the editorial beyond Tamil Nadu by dragging in all sorts of unrelated issues. Thus "…other parts of the country do not seem to be free from it either. Sania Mirza, who spoke in support of Ms. Kushboo in New Delhi, has come under attack from both Islamicist and Hindu fundamentalist groups. This is of a piece with the narrow-minded bigotry and intolerance exhibited by organisations such as the Shiv Sena and the mullahs who rail against Sania Mirza`s dress and comments…intolerant groups have begun using the criminal justice system as a means of harassment and intimidation… the law of criminal defamation is invoked… Such vexatious misuse by organised, intolerant groups is one more reason why the decriminalising of defamation brooks no delay." Of course, the Hindu knows where the shoe bites.
The Telegraph, usually sensible, also got it wrong. "Kushboo is alleged to have defamed all women… to have "denigrated" Tamil women, assaulted Tamil culture and promoted licentiousness… It is remarkable how a repressive conservatism, wholly directed against women, has been drummed up in recent times by most politicians and the media…"
Then it suddenly didn`t know what to say and went off into Tamil Nadu`s rates of female infanticide, its sex ratio, its rate of dowry-related violence. These it said are "some of the worst in the country." What has this to do with virginity at the time of marriage? It did get to the main point in passing when it observed "The repression and violence signal the strength of male domination."
The Deccan Herald said that the controversy had reached "ludicrous heights as everyone with a point of view seems to have something to say on the issue." Quite so. But then it went on to say the same things the others had said, namely the right to freedom of speech, expression etc. " Moral policing has spread its ugly tentacles all over the country and its target has mainly been women… the only people who gain from it are political affliations."
The Pioneer called it an "assault on a citizen`s inalienable right to freedom of expression… It is only a short distance that separates the hoodlum brigade hounding Ms Kushboo and those in Government who feel constrained by democracy. Our silence today will bring them together tomorrow."
The Indian Express was not much better. It shot off an edit based on history, sociology, and politics. "(In) Dravida politics today, irrationality is the order of the day…a gaggle of political parties have even launched a Tamil Protection Movement. Some of this almost certainly has to do with a crucial assembly election a few months away…"
Like the Hindu, it went on to talk about Mumbai and the bar girls and said "As the morality thugs run riot in Mumbai and Chennai, it`s time for reason to assert itself. We, as readers, as movie-goers, as citizens, need to speak out with conviction and anger before our eager Talibans render us both supine and bovine."
Finally, there was the rhetorical question that leader writers love: "Where will this stop, and who will stop it? This is dangerous stuff—the lunatic fringe becoming mainstream."
What rubbish. Such utter rot.