Freedom Of Choice : We Must Refrain From Trolling AR Rahman And His Daughter

Image Source: YouTube

A few days ago, Khatija Rahman, daughter of the legendary music director AR Rahman made a public appearance along with her father, bringing hijab into the limelight with a lot of discourse around it. The images made people go berserk and created a ruckus across all social/mass media platforms. AR Rahman was relentlessly trolled for forcibly imposing his religious orthodoxy onto his daughter. The gravity of the situation made Khatija put up a post on her Facebook wall, defending her choice and the right to live with dignity. Excerpts from her post say-

“The veil has been my personal choice with complete acceptance and honor. I’m a sane mature adult who knows to make my choices in life. Any human being has a choice to wear or do what he/she wants and that’s what I’ve been doing. Hence, kindly don’t make your own judgments without understanding the exact situation. #freedomofchoice #Embracingmyidentity’’.

The hijab is always seen as a means of ‘othering’ a section of women from the mainstream social fabric on account of unfamiliarity. The perpetrators of this othering or the hijab critics have historically denounced the use of hijab, marking it as a symbol of blatant patriarchy. Some criticisms also shuddered at the deep-rooted patriarchal conditioning which made women think it is necessary to cover a part of their identity as basic as their face. While we cannot fully denounce the role of patriarchal conditioning in the matter, it must be understood that patriarchal conditioning does not exclusively apply to hijab only. It comes forth in a lot of other religious symbols and more.

While we are refraining from violently opposing the other symbols, it is unfair and unjust to single out hijab from them all and launch an attack. The idea of consent expressed as ‘freedom of choice’ in the Facebook post also came under the radar, as many felt that in an oppressive and institutionally misogynist society it is not possible for the woman to take any decision completely devoid of any conditioned notion. Our deep-rooted socio-religious beliefs manifest in these supposedly arbitrary, free-willed decisions. All these arguments have put forth some valid points undoubtedly, but we must remember that nothing, absolutely nothing can contest the idea of free-willed consent pronounced by a woman. This is the trope on which patriarchy thrives on- first, it will refuse to acknowledge women their agency to give consent; secondly, when women finally gain their agency to give consent, it will nullify its authenticity.

Feminism, in this century invariably means intersectional feminism, where simply not a homogenous idea of oppression is propagated, but women from all ethnic backgrounds are included. In this era, where inclusiveness is the only way for a holistic society, it is unfair to single out and exclude a particular section of the oppressed.

The Constitution of India identifies the Indian union as a ‘secular’ nation, and not an ‘atheist’ nation. It does not denounce the whole idea of religion, rather it separates the state from actively propagating any religious ideas. But the citizens are free to practice any religion of their choice. Therefore, it is only imperative that a practicing religious person will carry some religious marks on his/her body. Ironically, it is mainly the women who have to bear the marks- be it sindoor,shakha-pola (vermilion)etc for Hindu married women, or hijab for Muslim women. Thus patriarchy affects women from all religious backgrounds, we cannot be oblivious to one form just because it is propagated by the majority population (and normalized) and denounce the other as regressive (and thus isolated).

We may have our personal opinions regarding hijab, which is absolutely fine in a liberal democracy, but when the opinion becomes prejudice and is being used to judge, discriminate and harass others, it becomes a menace. It is unbecoming of liberal democracy to discriminate people, just because they don’t conform to the familiar majority narrative. Our personal opinions cannot give birth to structural ‘othering’ and labeling of any community.

Clothing is a completely personal choice and if we denounce the patriarchal dictating of a woman’s clothing, we must not propagate it under the garb of feminism. Feminism never dictates. Feminism thrives on the idea of equality cutting across gender, race, ethnicity, skin color, religion, caste, creed, sexuality and so on. Feminism propagates freedom of choice. We cannot exclude and isolate a whole section of women from this battle against patriarchy, because it nullifies the whole guiding principle of feminism.

We must also try to acknowledge the sense of privilege (of being majority, and thus mainstream), which gives us the authority to label or denounce a section of society as regressive or backward. Whoever is on the privileged side of the status quo, becomes very vulnerable to see a narrative different from theirs. When members of the dominant group believe that their privilege is natural, and accept that their group is socially superior to others, they have internalized their dominant status in the society which gives them the authority to denounce diversity and difference. Intersectional feminism must critique this structural discrimination. We must discomfort the comfortable.

Similar Posts

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 Change.org, demanding that the Government of Assam install
biodegradable sanitary pad vending machines in all government schools across the state. Her petition on Change.org has already gathered support from over 90000 people and continues to grow.

Bidisha was selected in Change.org’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