Site icon Youth Ki Awaaz

Why are We Glorifying Division on the Grounds of Discrimination?

Division of any kind does not bring glory.

Yet, in today’s time, our perspective has become extremely divided. On one side, there’s oppression based on race, skin colour, religion, gender, and sexuality. On the other side, there’s empowerment based on race, skin colour, religion, gender, and sexuality.

In both cases, the base is ‘Division’ (skin/gender/sexuality/religion). Ultimately, division gets promoted.

For Oppressor

When EGO and insecurity get intertwined with a sense of superiority, then a human-being tends to suppress others who are different from them to show or prove “superiority”.

For Victims

A section of people is promoted based on a certain similarity. Creating a community based on a discriminatory basis (caste, religion, gender, sexuality) gives a sense of belongingness and righteousness.

In both cases, the sense of identity and ego gets a boost — on the ground of differentiation.

For Instance

The Black Lives Matter movement captured everyone’s attention due to George Floyd’s racism-related death. As a result, the whole world started promoting Black Lives Matter. Few other versions of this slogan also came and did some rounds were – Black and Brown Lives Matter; Black, Brown, and Yellow Lives Matter; Black, White, Brown, and Yellow lives Matter. Few also said All lives Matter.

Why there’s a need to say “______ Lives Matter”? Are we saying we are so numb and dumb that we need a reminder that _______ Lives Matter?

The incident started with discrimination based on skin colour, and it took another turn, which was also based on identification through skin colour.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I can clearly see discrimination as the common ground in both scenarios. Whether you use it to oppress or promote — discrimination is discrimination.

Similarly, gender is used heavily to discriminate.

Terms like a crime against women, women empowerment, feminism are used to promote an oppressed section of society. They are looked at as a need of the hour. And sure, initiatives based on such ideas have benefited some genuine people. But, is that all we want — benefit a small section of people?

Let’s say there are 100 people in a society. The moment you say, Empower 50 of them, and all will get empowered. Does it sound sensible to you?

To me, it doesn’t.

Yet, ‘women empowerment’ is promoted with this idea — empower women to empower society.

Feminism’s dictionary meaning — ‘the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of gender equality’. I have never read such a contradictory meaning of a word ever. First, you say ‘advocacy’ of women’s rights, and then you say our ground is ‘gender equality’.

I am not sure why there’s a need for advocacy if the ground is already gender equality. What are you promoting exactly — gender equality or women’s rights?

And then there’s another term; Crime against women. Let’s start with the very definition of crime? The dictionary meaning says — an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. To put it in a broader perspective, a crime can also be said as an act against humanity.

But, if this is the definition, then how come there comes a need to highlight what is between a victim’s leg? Was the act in itself not enough to suggest it’s unacceptability! What’s the point of dividing victims based on gender and justify discrimination because the gender highlighted is female.

And, has over the years, highlighting this division made anything better. From what I know, things have only gone worse. The ‘crime against women’ has only increased. Because ultimately, it promoted discrimination.

What if instead of saying Black Lives Matter you say: Christian Lives Matter, Muslim Lives Matter, Men Lives Matter, Transgender Lives Matter, or Lesbian Lives Matter.

What if you say: brown empowerment, black empowerment, a crime against Hindu, a crime against Buddhist, advocacy of SC/ST rights on grounds of equality, advocacy of Jain rights on grounds of equality.

Do all these make sense to you? To me, it doesn’t. I only changed the basis of differentiation above, and it started sounding strange and absurd to you. Then how come the original is not absurd?

A lie repeated thousands of times starts appearing like truth to our brain, but it never becomes the truth. It only creates our beliefs, which are basically assumptions who got too dear to us to leave. The same has happened with various division glorifying terms. They were repeated so many times by media, politicians, that you started believing in them. Before these terms the discrimination on various grounds was a problem, now it has become an agenda and propaganda.

The sense of equal opportunity and Equality doesn’t suggest to give someone extra because they were oppressed. Instead, it means to stop the oppression of every kind and make sure there’s no discrimination, which will ultimately result in Equality or equal opportunity.

The change will come when YOU stop discriminating. It doesn’t matter whether you discriminate ‘for’ or ‘against’. You need to stop giving any importance to these physical identities like caste, religion, skin color, gender, and sexuality.

YOU need to strengthen your inner world and reject ideas of superiority and victimization. Both are ego boosters. One says, pay attention to me because I am superior. The other says, pay attention to me because I am a victim. Essentially, both are seeking attention.

Only through developing your inner self can you realize how these physical identities have no relevance. They exist for a limited time. No matter our gender, caste, skin colour, sexuality, we all will die one day.

Being different or unique is good; differentiating people is not, whether for or against the cause.

Exit mobile version