Wake up and smell the new reality

My heart goes out to the National Commission for Women. They try so hard, poor dears, yet they never get it right. Today, they are trying to widen the scope of the Prohibition of Indecent Representation of Women Act, 1986, and set up a regulatory body, like the Film Censor Board, to screen the portrayal of women on television and in advertisements.

Personally, I would like to line up and shoot the entire cast and crew behind all the rubbish spouted by moustachioed men dressed as Rajasthani puppets flaunting a macho, rustic charm and ghoonghat-shrouded women heaving under the burden of tonnes of jewellery, layers of makeup and generations of suffering while cooking and cleaning and weeping. And I would love to wring the necks of some advertisers for their disgusting ads. But a regulatory body for media is not an easy thing — in India, freedom of expression is sacred and these ‘regulations’ could come dangerously close to censorship.

Apparently, the 1986 Act is not equipped to deal with the electronic media, Internet and mobile phones. “It also lacked proper implementation,” said NCW Chairperson Girija Vyas, “and there were hardly any convictions, hence the need for a new law.” By that logic, we would need a whole new law book. Laws are rarely implemented in India. Take rape — an easy enough crime to identify. No need to deliberate on whether it is derogatory or harmful for women. There are two rapes in India every hour. Only one in 70 rapes is reported. Of this, the conviction rate is only 27 per cent.

Besides, the new Act, Prohibition of Indecent Representation of Women and Children Act, 2008, has been in the pipeline since last year. Except that now NCW wants to bring advertisements into its ambit and also thereafter define advertisements anew. As far as I could make out, everything from a label to a notice to a smoke signal will be regarded as an ad and will be examined for sexism.

Apparently, the NCW thinks commodification of women in ads is a new trend. “It has been seen that advertisers of late are using women as an object to promote their commodities,” said Vyas. “There is no need for a woman to be there in an advertisement to promote, for instance, male perfumes, but the advertisers use their explicit pictures.” Wrong on both counts.

First, women have been commodified in advertisements for as long as I can remember, giving women’s libbers one of their strongest weapons against sexism. Second, a man’s perfume may actually have something to do with women — if we look at perfume as the man-made equivalent of pheromones in animals (including us) that, at opportune moments, act as a magnet for the opposite sex. Selling a car or a bike with a half-clad sexy woman lying on it is the traditional example. And it is still valid, after almost 40 years of finger pointing.

We have hordes of laws trying to protect women from discrimination and violence and to secure equal rights and opportunities. In spite of all those, women face considerable discrimination, deprivation and violence. And the NCW is of very little use at the time. Remember how its Nirmala Venkatesh seemed to blame the victims after the Ram Sena attacked women in that Mangalore pub? Sure, the NCW distanced itself from her and withdrew the report, but why was the report accepted in the first place?

How can a body so innocent of gender sensitivities be ruling on gender issues? In fact, it is so unaware that it has just gone back on its demand for a repeal of Section 377 and asked for a nationwide debate instead, as “the entire society was involved”. What prejudiced nonsense!

The NCW has to adapt to new realities before it attempts to regulate them.