This post has been self-published on Youth Ki Awaaz by Youth Ki Awaaz. Just like them, anyone can publish on Youth Ki Awaaz.

Why The Protest Against Abish Mathew’s Sexist Jokes – Open Letter From Protesters

More from Youth Ki Awaaz

Abish Mathew, comedian of the AIB Roast fame, performed at NLU Delhi on the 22nd of March for our annual fest, Kairos. Early in the show, Matthew cracked a joke on domestic violence, at which point, two women students who found the jokes to be extremely misogynistic, walked out showing him the middle finger. The audience reacted with some tittering, and Abish Mathew fumbled momentarily before resuming. The audience asked him to carry on and to ignore the protesters. In the mean time, a group of female students marched into the auditorium holding placards reading “Get Out, Sexist Pig”, and also used expletives such as ‘fuck off’.

abish mathew

The auditorium erupted in shouts of “fuck you guys”. The protesters were booed and heckled by the audience members who demanded that the protestors either leave or move to the side. They eventually did move to the side of the auditorium, where they continued to hold their placards up and attempted to interrupt him. Abish was greeted by a standing ovation when he stated that he was an artist and recognized the right of the protesters, and subsequently, when he ended his show by stating he had overstayed his welcome.

After repeated efforts to meet with Abish Mathew, one of the protesters was allowed to speak with him. During the conversation, he said that he had no idea that jokes about these issues would warrant such a strong response. He revealed that he does not crack jokes about female foeticide, for instance, as he recognized the issue to be a grave one. But he clearly did not draw a similar link to domestic violence.

As the protesters exited the auditorium, they were met with a hostile crowd that was yelling at them. Their clothes were commented upon, and jokes were made about prior incidents of sexual harassment on campus and one of the protesters was pushed. The protest and the subsequent incidents sparked off a debate over email and social media as well, with people agreeing and disagreeing in various degrees with the form and substance of the protest.

We believe that sexism is all pervasive and even if propagated in the garb of humour, it causes greater social harm than mere insult or offence. Sexist jokes serve not only to trivialize grave issues such as domestic violence, but also render these issues invisible within larger institutional structures of oppression, thereby reifying these structures.

The jokes cracked pertained to domestic violence, women’s physical appearance and sexual (un)attractiveness. They also reiterated the traits that are traditionally ascribed to women. Domestic violence is an institutionalized and systematic form of abuse. As an issue, this is seen as being situated within the realm of the “private”; victims and survivors often find it difficult to seek redressal because of its normalization. Joking about domestic violence perpetuates a culture where violence against women is the norm. Further, such jokes may act as a trigger for members of the audience who may be victims or survivors of such violence.

Mathew also commented on the physical appearance and sexual “unattractiveness” of the ex Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh – Mayawati, who is one of the most powerful leaders of the country and is a Dalit woman. He chose to critique her appearance, completely glossing over her achievements and how she overcame several structural hurdles to occupy such a powerful position. In the world we inhabit, women are pressurized to conform to patriarchal standards of beauty. There are entire industries based on fragmenting women’s bodies and selling beauty as her most pivotal aspect. Many women, all over the world, develop eating disorders, suffer from low self esteem, and undergo emotional trauma because of their inability to conform to what is regarded as the ideal body type. In such a situation, to joke about ‘pretty Punjabi women’ ballooning from Maruti Swift to Maruti Swift Dzire after their marriage was deeply problematic.

nluMathew painted a troublesome picture of women, drawing upon traditional roles assigned to them in a patriarchal society – of being predominantly someone meant to serve the men in her life. He joked how a woman, while having sex with her husband, noticed how dirty the house was, and called her domestic help as soon as her ‘sahib’ was done, so the house could be cleaned. This may also be a reflection of how women are expected to be inanimate blow-up dolls during sex, where it is solely the male partner who experiences pleasure.

Some of his other jokes included women being bad drivers, as while driving, they simultaneously perform other tasks such as putting on make-up and feeding their babies. Even if one is to accept the unproved claim that women are bad drivers, there are various sociological reasons for why women may be bad drivers, such as their being caged into homes and lack of opportunities for them to navigate public spaces without fear.

The protesters believe that abstaining from commenting adversely on marginalized communities should not be confined to only academic spaces, but should also be accommodated into our lives, because political correctness must not be treated as an instrument of appeasement. We believe that our advocacy for substantive equality must be internalized and not just serve as a charade. The burden of political correctness transcends the boundary between the public and the private and travels with a person regardless of the nature of activity being carried out. Further, the conscious enjoyment of sexist jokes is antithetical to the very tenets of feminism.

It is our view that not all speech warrants the same level of protection. For instance, there exists almost universal consensus against child pornography. Similarly, speech that perpetuates harmful stereotypes and reifies power structures that serve to oppress certain groups of people should be restricted through social shaming. Certain communities face a disparate impact of certain kinds of speech and that is to be gauged entirely from who is saying what to whom and in what conditions. The protesters are not of the view that discussion and comedy cantered on issues such as domestic violence and rape must cease. They are in full support of subversive narratives that handle these issues with sensitivity.

Now, moving on to the form that the protest took, it is important to keep in mind that it was spontaneous. While we continue to maintain that the form of protest we chose was legitimate, in hindsight, we recognize that perhaps alternate feminist methods of expressing our dissent could have been explored, given the circumstances. As a community, our commitment to feminism cannot be so fragile that we abandon the cause merely because of disagreement on the suitability of the form of protest. We believe that different forms of protests are ‘suitable’ for different situations and it should be up to the protesters to choose their form keeping in mind the circumstances. A certain form of protest may be ‘unsuitable’ for a situation but nonetheless legitimate. One could imagine that a marginalized group may face a situation where they are pushed to a corner, and therefore feel the need to resort to a disruptive protest. Indeed it would be ironic for persons not part of the protest to be dictating the form of protest.

However, given the current political climate in the country, where various forms of speech have been censored, our form of protest was perhaps disempowering to minority groups like ours. After all, the marginalized and oppressed are the easiest to put down, and our form of protest may, in that sense, contribute to our own disempowerment. In retrospect, we do believe that there might have been a better but equally legitimate form as we adopted. We must also realize that consequences of an alternative form of protest are up to conjecture, and there is no guarantee that they would have led to an unprecedented engagement on the issue.

Our protest has often been equated with a ‘heckler’s veto’, however this is a mischaracterization as the protest did not command the power to use institutionalized machinery in order to stifle speech. The protesters represented a minority both numerically and ideologically, and were protesting against a dominant and pervasive narrative. We cannot, therefore, be likened to a majoritarian group restricting the speech of minorities. Further, our speech did not even constitute ‘heckling’. The right to free speech does not subsume the right to consequence free speech. Just as clapping, cheering and hooting in appreciation are legitimate reactions to a speech, a critical reaction, which may not be courteous or polite, is also as legitimate. Moreover, denying us our right to protest would have impinged on our right to free speech. If we deem only speech recognized as deserving of legitimate state restrictions as expression which can be legitimately protested against by non-state actors – that would spell death for free speech of dissent.

We believe that protests are often disruptive, even when non-violent, and legitimately so. Some of the world’s most successful non-violent protests have been extremely disruptive. During the women’s suffrage movement in the United States, while women protested outside the White House fighting for their right to vote, the State decided to crack down on them using the charge of obstruction of traffic against the non-violent protesters. In order to achieve one’s political goals under certain circumstances, disruption becomes essential.

Many have raised the concern that if we did have a problem with the sort of jokes Abish Mathew cracked, we should have protested with the organisers long before the show; given that it is public knowledge that he is known to crack jokes that are derogatory to oppressed groups. If the organisers were aware that Abish Mathew would be cracking sexist jokes, should not the burden be on them to ensure that he didn’t do so on our campus? Within the free speech paradigm, a protest following problematic speech enjoys more legitimacy than stifling speech before it has been uttered. Pre-censorship of speech requires a far greater burden to be discharged. Further, while Abish Mathew may have the right to free speech, to our mind, he does not have the right to the platform of our University auditorium because we are trying to create a space where people belonging to all genders feel safe, and our protest was against the use of University space to perpetuate sexism through humour.

We must recognize that speech can effectively counter other speech if the marketplace of speech is actually free. However, in the real world, different power differentials and structures do exist. And for that reason, one speaker has a position of power over the other. In this case, Abish Mathew had the mic and stage, while the protesters, carrying their posters, were asked to move aside, and to let the show continue. If we were to truly give counter speech a chance, should we not have created space for that speech? Is it enough to say that they could have countered Abish’s speech later, for instance through a blog post? Or should the organisers have given the protesters the stage for a few minutes after Abish’s speech?

The reactions directed towards the protesters, both at the time of the protest and after were quite hostile, and point towards the need to introspect about the necessity to nurture space for dissent and protest. Some protesters personally felt unsafe after this incident. Feeling unsafe is a very personal experience, shaped by the lived experience of women in our society, and is not something that calls for an explanation.

Despite past events, it is heartening to see that the protest has generated dialogue, debate and introspection both within our University and outside. A healthy and fruitful debate attended by large numbers took place within our campus three days after the protest. This is a small victory in pursuance of achieving our larger aim as a University, towards building a more inclusive campus where persons of all genders feel free.

Protesters and Supporters:
Aarushi Mahajan
C.V. Aradhana
Gale Andrew
Jagata Krishna Swaminathan
Mahima Jain
Malavika Parthasarthy
Nishtha Sinha
Pawani Mathur
Rishika Sahgal
Shweta Kabra
Sonal Sarda
Chinmay Kanojia
Lakshya Gupta
Vaibhav Dutt

You must be to comment.
  1. D Gill

    “He revealed that he does not crack jokes about female foeticide, for instance, as he recognized the issue to be a grave one. But he clearly did not draw a similar link to domestic violence.”

    Ah ok, beating ones spouse and killing them is just jokes right? Abish Mathew, get your mind sorted out.

  2. chakradhar bandaru

    Have the courage to bear the TRUTH. Listen it understand it. Then if u feel irritated convert it to debate. Make ur opponent feel wrong for his speech . Make him feel what u feel for that speech and why u feel it? If it hurt u then for sure it will hurt him too. Insulting him will even lead to rages, ego and enemies.
    Which is not good in a social living beings.

  3. RG

    A day after Section 66A was quashed by the Supreme Court, the feminists have turned their attention to an art-form. At this juncture, all I can remind these narrow-minded narcissists – is to check up the judgement made for the movie ‘PK’ when similar protests were made: “If you dont like it, dont watch it”. Get it, you femi-naxal?

  4. Ritesh Anan

    Ok Ladies since you wrote this yourself perhaps, hope you get also get time to read this comment and since you feel ‘threatened’ and people have behaved violently with you/ used derogatory language, let me assure you that this comment won’t have any of those elements, but would be BASED PURELY ON LOGIC AND DATA

    Now kindly go to YouTube and choose 10 videos from Indian stand-up comedians or for that matter any nationality you prefer. Now let’s try and find patterns, themes among the jokes being made. You won’t even have to try hard, just go through the videos.

    Invairably there are only a few themes on which the jokes get made-

    1) The communities & ethnicity – North Indians, Biharis, Gujaratis, Marwaris etc. even the ‘wife beating’ you got offended upon was actually a pun on malyalees
    > We must ban all these jokes and protest because they hurt sentiments of the people, communities involved.

    2) Fat/Thin – “yo mama is so fat…”
    > Hurts sentiment of fat and skinny people, Lets ban them too and Protest

    3) Rich/Poor( That’s called dark comedy) – ‘all poor people look alike’
    > Every rich/poor person would get offended, Lets ban them too and Protest

    4) Geo-Politics – Rise of ISIS, troubles in mid-east, Guantanamo Bay, China-japan/India-Pakistan rivalry.
    > People of that particular region will get offended, Lets ban them too and Protest

    5) God/religion/customs – Don’t need to elaborate on this
    >Lets ban them too and Protest

    6) Cuss words – offends a whole lot of people
    >Lets ban them too and Protest

    I could go on and on and on and regardless of what type of joke it is or the theme it belongs to, someone or the other can easily take offence, but hope I have driven home my point here.



    Btw, I forgot, calling a women a ‘b!+c#” is misogynist, sexist. However, calling a man ‘Pig’ is alright


    1. chakradhar bandaru

      Seriously man this sasural serials leads man life to hell. Sasa and bahu fights and the man between them the male spouse gets confused to take side of whom. Some banish their parent and some themselves from home and some evil are also their who beats spouse.
      But I’m not like them let them make the serials and watch. No need to ban it . Boys are Boys and Girls are Girls. Next time you guys call a comedian. Then take a auditorium or class room for privacy from girls to enjoy jokes. Some don’t even like to smile . Then its their choice.

  5. Bhuwan

    These are just jokes! Normal men joke about these things because they are not real to them. What would women stand up comedians joke about. Those who heckled at the protesters, were they all men? Those who gave the standing ovation, were they all men? When protestors cried “fuck you guys!”, is not that politically incorrect as well?

  6. Ravi

    Yaar you people have a problem with everything. It helps to chill sometimes and laugh at yourselves.

  7. Ann

    so u think domestic violence is a topic u can joke about just like rape it’s not serious enough? sure coming from an indian it’s not at all socking it’s anyway a regular thing that happens and we should applaud and laugh along with the rest .why should anyone think of these as offensive? and u still want to know why indian students are denied admission abroad?

    1. Bhuwan

      All I am saying is that all comic materials by all stand up comedians (including women) are sensitive materials. None of these or those issues should be joked about at all. where do you draw the line? Like Ritesh in the comments above mentions. I do not want a society that hesitates to talk about anything controversial at all because that will not be healthy.

    2. Ritesh Anan


      With all due respect, the only reason Indians are denied admissions abroad is because of RACIST SCUMBAGS LIKE YOU!
      Its racist dimwits like you who compare crime committed by a minority of sociopaths to a nation of 1.3 billion people.

      I would have provided data, statistics on this, on how thousands of American women are raped in colleges which go unreported (doesn’t make every american/westerner rapist), but then I thought it’s useless to waste that much effort to change the view of a HATER.

      As far as topic related to joking on topics is concerned, Bhuwan has already answered that.

  8. Hara

    Only in India, every comedy should be approved by
    1. Religious heads,
    2. Feminists,
    3. Censor Board,
    4. Moral Police groups,
    5. Right wing conservatives,
    6. Left wing socialists.

More from Youth Ki Awaaz

Similar Posts

By Kritika Nautiyal

By Priyasmita Dutta

By Prabhanu Kumar Das

Wondering what to write about?

Here are some topics to get you started

Share your details to download the report.

We promise not to spam or send irrelevant information.

Share your details to download the report.

We promise not to spam or send irrelevant information.

An ambassador and trained facilitator under Eco Femme (a social enterprise working towards menstrual health in south India), Sanjina is also an active member of the MHM Collective- India and Menstrual Health Alliance- India. She has conducted Menstrual Health sessions in multiple government schools adopted by Rotary District 3240 as part of their WinS project in rural Bengal. She has also delivered training of trainers on SRHR, gender, sexuality and Menstruation for Tomorrow’s Foundation, Vikramshila Education Resource Society, Nirdhan trust and Micro Finance, Tollygunj Women In Need, Paint It Red in Kolkata.

Now as an MH Fellow with YKA, she’s expanding her impressive scope of work further by launching a campaign to facilitate the process of ensuring better menstrual health and SRH services for women residing in correctional homes in West Bengal. The campaign will entail an independent study to take stalk of the present conditions of MHM in correctional homes across the state and use its findings to build public support and political will to take the necessary action.

Saurabh has been associated with YKA as a user and has consistently been writing on the issue MHM and its intersectionality with other issues in the society. Now as an MHM Fellow with YKA, he’s launched the Right to Period campaign, which aims to ensure proper execution of MHM guidelines in Delhi’s schools.

The long-term aim of the campaign is to develop an open culture where menstruation is not treated as a taboo. The campaign also seeks to hold the schools accountable for their responsibilities as an important component in the implementation of MHM policies by making adequate sanitation infrastructure and knowledge of MHM available in school premises.

Read more about his campaign.

Harshita is a psychologist and works to support people with mental health issues, particularly adolescents who are survivors of violence. Associated with the Azadi Foundation in UP, Harshita became an MHM Fellow with YKA, with the aim of promoting better menstrual health.

Her campaign #MeriMarzi aims to promote menstrual health and wellness, hygiene and facilities for female sex workers in UP. She says, “Knowledge about natural body processes is a very basic human right. And for individuals whose occupation is providing sexual services, it becomes even more important.”

Meri Marzi aims to ensure sensitised, non-discriminatory health workers for the needs of female sex workers in the Suraksha Clinics under the UPSACS (Uttar Pradesh State AIDS Control Society) program by creating more dialogues and garnering public support for the cause of sex workers’ menstrual rights. The campaign will also ensure interventions with sex workers to clear misconceptions around overall hygiene management to ensure that results flow both ways.

Read more about her campaign.

MH Fellow Sabna comes with significant experience working with a range of development issues. A co-founder of Project Sakhi Saheli, which aims to combat period poverty and break menstrual taboos, Sabna has, in the past, worked on the issue of menstruation in urban slums of Delhi with women and adolescent girls. She and her team also released MenstraBook, with menstrastories and organised Menstra Tlk in the Delhi School of Social Work to create more conversations on menstruation.

With YKA MHM Fellow Vineet, Sabna launched Menstratalk, a campaign that aims to put an end to period poverty and smash menstrual taboos in society. As a start, the campaign aims to begin conversations on menstrual health with five hundred adolescents and youth in Delhi through offline platforms, and through this community mobilise support to create Period Friendly Institutions out of educational institutes in the city.

Read more about her campaign. 

A student from Delhi School of Social work, Vineet is a part of Project Sakhi Saheli, an initiative by the students of Delhi school of Social Work to create awareness on Menstrual Health and combat Period Poverty. Along with MHM Action Fellow Sabna, Vineet launched Menstratalk, a campaign that aims to put an end to period poverty and smash menstrual taboos in society.

As a start, the campaign aims to begin conversations on menstrual health with five hundred adolescents and youth in Delhi through offline platforms, and through this community mobilise support to create Period Friendly Institutions out of educational institutes in the city.

Find out more about the campaign here.

A native of Bhagalpur district – Bihar, Shalini Jha believes in equal rights for all genders and wants to work for a gender-equal and just society. In the past she’s had a year-long association as a community leader with Haiyya: Organise for Action’s Health Over Stigma campaign. She’s pursuing a Master’s in Literature with Ambedkar University, Delhi and as an MHM Fellow with YKA, recently launched ‘Project अल्हड़ (Alharh)’.

She says, “Bihar is ranked the lowest in India’s SDG Index 2019 for India. Hygienic and comfortable menstruation is a basic human right and sustainable development cannot be ensured if menstruators are deprived of their basic rights.” Project अल्हड़ (Alharh) aims to create a robust sensitised community in Bhagalpur to collectively spread awareness, break the taboo, debunk myths and initiate fearless conversations around menstruation. The campaign aims to reach at least 6000 adolescent girls from government and private schools in Baghalpur district in 2020.

Read more about the campaign here.

A psychologist and co-founder of a mental health NGO called Customize Cognition, Ritika forayed into the space of menstrual health and hygiene, sexual and reproductive healthcare and rights and gender equality as an MHM Fellow with YKA. She says, “The experience of working on MHM/SRHR and gender equality has been an enriching and eye-opening experience. I have learned what’s beneath the surface of the issue, be it awareness, lack of resources or disregard for trans men, who also menstruate.”

The Transmen-ses campaign aims to tackle the issue of silence and disregard for trans men’s menstruation needs, by mobilising gender sensitive health professionals and gender neutral restrooms in Lucknow.

Read more about the campaign here.

A Computer Science engineer by education, Nitisha started her career in the corporate sector, before realising she wanted to work in the development and social justice space. Since then, she has worked with Teach For India and Care India and is from the founding batch of Indian School of Development Management (ISDM), a one of its kind organisation creating leaders for the development sector through its experiential learning post graduate program.

As a Youth Ki Awaaz Menstrual Health Fellow, Nitisha has started Let’s Talk Period, a campaign to mobilise young people to switch to sustainable period products. She says, “80 lakh women in Delhi use non-biodegradable sanitary products, generate 3000 tonnes of menstrual waste, that takes 500-800 years to decompose; which in turn contributes to the health issues of all menstruators, increased burden of waste management on the city and harmful living environment for all citizens.

Let’s Talk Period aims to change this by

Find out more about her campaign here.

Share your details to download the report.

We promise not to spam or send irrelevant information.

A former Assistant Secretary with the Ministry of Women and Child Development in West Bengal for three months, Lakshmi Bhavya has been championing the cause of menstrual hygiene in her district. By associating herself with the Lalana Campaign, a holistic menstrual hygiene awareness campaign which is conducted by the Anahat NGO, Lakshmi has been slowly breaking taboos when it comes to periods and menstrual hygiene.

A Gender Rights Activist working with the tribal and marginalized communities in india, Srilekha is a PhD scholar working on understanding body and sexuality among tribal girls, to fill the gaps in research around indigenous women and their stories. Srilekha has worked extensively at the grassroots level with community based organisations, through several advocacy initiatives around Gender, Mental Health, Menstrual Hygiene and Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights (SRHR) for the indigenous in Jharkhand, over the last 6 years.

Srilekha has also contributed to sustainable livelihood projects and legal aid programs for survivors of sex trafficking. She has been conducting research based programs on maternal health, mental health, gender based violence, sex and sexuality. Her interest lies in conducting workshops for young people on life skills, feminism, gender and sexuality, trauma, resilience and interpersonal relationships.

A Guwahati-based college student pursuing her Masters in Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Bidisha started the #BleedwithDignity campaign on the technology platform, demanding that the Government of Assam install
biodegradable sanitary pad vending machines in all government schools across the state. Her petition on has already gathered support from over 90000 people and continues to grow.

Bidisha was selected in’s flagship program ‘She Creates Change’ having run successful online advocacy
campaigns, which were widely recognised. Through the #BleedwithDignity campaign; she organised and celebrated World Menstrual Hygiene Day, 2019 in Guwahati, Assam by hosting a wall mural by collaborating with local organisations. The initiative was widely covered by national and local media, and the mural was later inaugurated by the event’s chief guest Commissioner of Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC) Debeswar Malakar, IAS.

Sign up for the Youth Ki Awaaz Prime Ministerial Brief below