I say this with an open mind, well aware of the echoes of backlash I might receive from ever-critical naysayers of their very own misconstrued version of ‘feminism.’ Feminism has always been about equal rights and equal opportunities for both sexes — male and female. However, the fourth wave of feminism has been broadened to include within its ambit the rights of transgender people and other members of the LGBTQIA+ diaspora.
Marital Rape: Criminalize it, Criminalize it not
I say this in light of the recent judgments of the courts of law, societal notions, and inhibitions that have come to the surface. In India, the ongoing debate of criminalizing marital rape is not unheard of, although surprisingly, it is hardly ever acknowledged. Almost as if it were a default setting, the first pronounced flaw that critics of criminalizing marital rape point out is the incapacity to acquire the requisite proof of the crime.
Valid, extremely valid. The very scale on which the culpability of a criminal is decided, especially in the criminal jurisprudence in India, is even higher than the conventional ‘preponderance of probability’ scale, to extend to that of ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt.’ How will the victim of marital rape, a crime of such nature that, if committed, happens within the four walls of the only place that women are supposed to feel safe in, ever prove to the court ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that her husband has raped her? Notice I say women because, in the majority of marital rape cases around the world, it has been husbands who have been the perpetrators of marital rape.
I see the lacuna in criminalizing marital rape — after all, you cannot possibly base the entire standard of proof on trusting women. However, this inherent lacuna is no reason for shunning the discourse on marital rape altogether. The least we can do is give women the benefit of the doubt when she says that she has been a victim of a crime, especially marital rape. Allow me to explain something to those who are unsatisfied with this contention.
We live in a patriarchal society which is predominantly run by men — and by ‘run,’ I do not mean run unanimously. It is funny how, in our society, men have a say in women’s reproductive and sexual rights, men have a say in women’s employment opportunities and pay scales, and men allegedly have a say in how women choose to express themselves. In such a society, god forbid if a woman, in the exercise of her right, incriminates a man for a crime that he committed, the very first response is never about shaming the man. It is almost always about interrogating the woman about her whereabouts, morality, and lack of preparedness. Moreover, women who do not earn a livelihood are financially bonded to their husbands and are often suppressed — emotionally and physically. With nowhere else to go, they often become mute spectators and victims of marital rapes.
When such is the circumstance in most households in India, it takes real courage for women to speak up against their husbands who have been perpetrators of marital rape. Women who choose to speak up often risk being divorced, abandoned, ridiculed, or subjected to domestic violence. When this is the case, it is reasonable to assume that women would not be willing to risk an awful lot just to incriminate a man for an ulterior motive.
Are we getting on board with the menstruation policy discussion? Make room for empathy!
There has been a recent discourse about the menstruation leave policy for women in universities and corporate offices — a welcome discussion yet to be duly formulated. The discourse is about formulating a paid menstrual leave policy for women, apart from the paid sick leaves. Even when the discourse has not even reached its peak, critics, albeit fairly, have pointed out that women have the potential to misuse the paid menstrual sick leaves given to them. While the aforementioned concern largely stems from a male gaze of policy making, the broader discourse delves into the possibility of increased discrimination that women might face, owing to the reluctance of employers to employ women.
While the policy for the corporate world is still being debated, a few progressive universities in India, mostly law schools, have taken a step forward and introduced menstrual leave policies for their students. For instance, the Maharashtra National Law University has granted one day per month of menstrual leave for its female students. This is a fresh, welcome change and is actively being implemented by several other universities.
On this note, I’ll conclude with a sigh, although hopeful for what the future holds for women everywhere.