First on the list is "more women's loos." This isn't a joke. The TimeOut writers say "Indian men understand 'public toilet' the way fish understand water." I've seen well-heeled businessman transfer their briefcase to the other hand in order to unzip beside a crowded road. Auto drivers regularly stop their taxis to take a whiz al fresco.
What really bothers me about it is that, as a woman, I can't do the same (of course, utopia is a place where no one uses the streets as a public loo, but anyway...)
Why does this bother me? Not because I really want to expose myself to the chaiwallahs, pharmacists and general gawkers who hang around by the Indian roadside. Actually, the entire Indian attitude towards "modesty" bothers me because it's hypocritical.
I have nothing against a more physically modest society, per se, but I've found that no matter how much people yammer on about equality, the traditional burden always falls only on women.
A few months ago our family pulled into our "ancestral village," a sand-dune-dotted roadside corner where camels are plentiful but cars are in short supply, and I saw all the women were veiled to the chin. Men roamed the streets in undershirts so torn they showed off every rib. This is the state of things in North India.
This all became even personal last week, when I attracted the ire of one of the personal trainers at the gym. Ok, let me preface: I've been an avid gym-goer for the past five years. I usually run about four miles on the treadmill. And I always wear shorts and a T-shirt. Well, I'd been going to this gym for about three weeks, when the lady trainer - whose job consists, it seems, of hanging around and occasionally demonstrating how the equipment works - pulled me aside. "Ma'am, you should buy tights to wear with your shorts," she told me, in all seriousness. At first, I was worried that I'd perhaps been a little too vigorous with the leg lifts, or something. Not at all. "No one saw anything," she confirmed. "but it just doesn't look nice."
A lot of people will look at this situation and say that I'm in the wrong. Indian women just don't wear shorts, ever. Night or day, even though they live in the tropics, their gams stay under wraps. Someone could say, "When in Rome, Anika..." And they'd be right. Never mind that no one else has ever complained. Never mind that there's no official rule about it. And most of all, never mind that half the men at the gym were wearing shorts the same length as mine.
I'm quite aware that bare female legs go against Indian custom, but my point is this: either we should all suit up, or we should all strip down. Or should those of us who live in India accept that sexism is Indian too?
The most interesting part of this whole debate is that I'd worn shorts to that same gym - in front of that same trainer - before. But previously, the gym was empty. That morning, there happened to be about five or six other people there, all male. Which is probably why the trainer made the remark. But why did she ask me to change my dress, instead of asking the men to respect my privacy and direct their gazes elsewhere? The idea that it's all right to ask a woman to make a sacrifice because "she'll understand, and men won't" or even because the asker is intimidated to start a conflict with a male attendee - well, that doesn't seem nice to me.
Readers, you're thinking: she's overthinking this. Maybe I'm getting a little too hung up on freedom of dress, which after all doesn't appear in any Constitution. What bothers me most, though, is the belief that somehow I'm responsible for the behavior of the men at the gym or on the street. All right, I dress in pants on the street or at home. But the gym is the last place where I feel like I can express my rebellion against the idea that the earth and everything on it belongs to men alone, and women who dare to show skin are inviting danger upon themselves.
In the United States, if a personal trainer went up to to a woman who was wearing long pants and asked her to work out in less clothing because "it would look better", it would be grounds for a lawsuit. Really, why is this any different?
(And is my entire approach to this situation 'too American'? People here would say that I 'just doesn't understand.' They'd be right. I can't help but overreact to this. I wish that weren't so.)
seriously, i care little what a gym allows its members to wear (or not), as long as its position is in print on a wall. THAT forces the org to think about what they are requiring, and whether its reasonable or fair. methinks proper gym attire is what covers the basics and is comfortable to work out in. after that, freedom of dress would do well to equate with freedom of comfort. THAT is what bothers me - that a woman is expected to dress less comfortably than a man to be acceptable. But then, we women choose to wear pencil heels and push-up bras and all that makeup - so perhaps we unwittingly encourage this dual standard by employing it ourselves? reminds me of a phrase Ayn Rand used, "sanction of the victim".
ReplyDeleteand finally, women need to stick by each other and defend each other more - and a little less cattiness please. Over the years, my better bosses have been male - and they understand work:life balance better. How wierd and self-defeatist is that for the global sisterhood?
please, ladies, if we support our girlfriends more, we'll get better treatment from our guy friends. what goes around comes around and all that....