Site icon Youth Ki Awaaz

LawSikho’s ‘Dating Webinar’ Was One Hour Laden With Misogyny, Sexism And Belittling Women

Lawsikho's Dating Webinar Was Misogynistic

The incident of Bois Locker Room is being discussed actively in various social circles. While we know that episodes like this are only the tip of the iceberg that is rape culture, what now has to be taken away is the recognition of and the need to correct faulty conditioning of men and women, the skewed ideas around disciplining in diverse settings, the propagation of chauvinism through different media, the distorted images of a ‘potential’ harasser and an ‘ideal’ victim, and the deviant response driven by deflection.

Another important lesson is to realize that restorative justice is about creating alternatives for improvement but it does not mean doing away with accountability and responsibility of actions. Such incidents highlight the underlying misogyny and rape culture that is often discounted while understanding the experiences of ‘non-men’ people.

So, Something Happened. Again.

Another incident that has been doing rounds over social media is the dating webinar conducted by LawSikho, an organization that claims to produce ‘India’s most extraordinary lawyers and business leaders’ through their online legal education and training programmes. On May 15, 2020, the company conducted a Zoom webinar for ‘men only’ on the topic, ‘How can busy professionals have a dating life’, clearly alluding that women and the LGBTQIA+ community are neither busy, nor professionals, and that they need not be a part of the conversation about dating.

The host of the webinar, Ramanuj Mukherjee, who is also the CEO of the company, addressed this exclusionary feature by ‘assuring’ that there will be another webinar for women as well. Nonetheless, this justification does not suffice as including women in a conversation about them would have possibly facilitated healthy delivery of the session and given added perspective.

Kshitij Sehrawat, a self-appointed ‘dating coach’ who claims to have a lot of ‘field experience’ with women, was invited as the speaker to advice men on ‘how to get women of beauty to date them’. His content across various digital platforms is proof enough of how his seemingly progressive work around modern dating is ladened with sexism and lethal ideas of masculinity.

For instance, on his portal called ‘Iron Man Lifestyle’, he has advertised his service using words like, “Before coming to me, a student of mine was a virgin for 25 years of his life. In 3 days, he lost it”. This speaks volumes about the ideology and ethics of not just the speaker but also the organization that had invited him.

What Happened On That Webinar: “Women Are The Worst People To Seek Dating Advice From, They Don’t Know What They Desire” And More

The webinar commenced with the CEO talking about the need for men to learn the ‘art of seduction’ the right way, in light of the Bois Locker Room event. However, it was heavily loaded with intentions and attempts to normalize the commodification of women.

In the beginning, Ramanuj talked about rejecting hegemonic, toxic masculine traits and supporting feminism. Conversely, throughout the session, one could see the overt propagation of gender roles, a hypersexualised male figure, standardized beauty and body images, and belittlement of women.

Upon being asked questions like, “Can you be yourself and date without being misogynistic?”, the coach who claims to understand women psychology had answers such as “Being yourself will not fetch you different results”. He went on to ask the moderator to define objectification and misogyny for him. According to him, “women are the worst people to seek dating advice from, as they do not know what they desire”.

He advocates ‘guessing’ what creepy behaviour would entail, rather than asking women. He said that women seek emotional connection, which is exactly what men should beware of, to not come across as desperate or weak; they should rather always lead to making sure ‘women come along’.

Additionally, men should be able to meet the girl within four days to ensure that attraction does not die down and the ‘bread does not go stale’, while comfort building must come later.

The dating expert asserted the importance of living up to the image of an ‘alpha-male’, one who is into sports, gym, buying women presents, having a lot of sex, validating all in the name of his experience with women. What needs to be established here is that ‘women’ is not a homogeneous category, and there cannot be a universal dating ‘formula’ applicable to all women.

What also came up during the discussion was a ‘No dating policy’ that LawSikho has in place for its employees. The CEO rationalized it by quoting several reasons, one of which was that dating in the workspace mostly results in the surfacing of sexual harassment cases. This highlights the underlying assumption that women tend to slap men with false cases when their relationships fail.

Law is not created in a vacuum; it rather reflects and influences societal norms. There has been much discussion around the field of law lacking a gender-sensitive lens. While the organizers and facilitators should have been more responsible in engaging with male lawyers, the focal point should perhaps be ensuring access and efficient functioning of Internal Complaints Committees in work settings, instead of a futile ‘no dating policy’.

Continuing The List Of Everything Wrong With The Webinar, There Was Also Gaslighting And Constant Interruption

After almost one hour into the webinar, a woman, through her friend’s zoom handle, called out the moderator and speaker for the sexist course of the session. She was not just repetitively interrupted but also yelled at, mocked, gaslighted, and eventually cut off from the dialogue by hijacking it.

It was ironic how they labelled the woman ‘overly sensitive’ while turning out to be man-children themselves.

Moreover, complying to the misogyny of other men only fosters more toxicity, as it catalyzes networks of violence-supportive social relationships. It is crucial to notice that even though disagreeing is a feature of a healthy debate, it cannot be used as a defence to rationalize structural inequalities.

The subsequent rage and dissatisfaction of numerous law professionals and aspirants led the CEO to issue a half-baked public apology, where he deviated from much-needed acknowledgement by sweeping the issue under the carpet and constantly justifying his reaction.

On Entitlement And Consent: Sex Is Not Something Women ‘Give’ And Men ‘Achieve’

What could have been a webinar attempting to redefine dating, ended up equating it with sex alone, which is a highly stunted and linear view around dating. While for some people it may be preferable, it should not be standardized under the garb of modernity.

Dating need not be a ‘game’ or a competition where women have to be ‘won’. It is vital to understand that sex is not something held by women, something that women ‘give’ and men ‘achieve’.

The propagation of the idea that men have to incessantly chase a woman is extremely problematic and condemnable. The undertone to such a thought is that men are mechanical beings who are entitled to a ‘constant and natural’ state of sexual arousal. This barely allows space to be empathetic and respectful.

There is a need to comprehend consent as a two-way street, where a person does not have to wait for the other party to say ‘no’ upon feeling discomfort; it should rather be actively sought. It is not just about discontinuing and apologizing but also making sure that distress does not arise in the first place.

Often in situations of sexual misconduct in heterosexual intimate relationships, men tend to exploit the structures of inequality that allow them to be free of answerability. Such an attitude comes from a position of superiority and is a conscious choice.

This further fuels the culture of victim-blaming by certifying the language of proof only, let alone redressal.

We Need A Tectonic Shift In The Attitudes Of Men

Asking, active listening and communication are indispensable to learning about someone we think we might know. There is an absolute need to have more conversations about men with men to make sure that we do not have to settle with ‘Men will be men’. There have to be tectonic attitudinal and behavioural shifts along with transfer of accountability and a greater focus on men’s actions.

Exit mobile version