Our conversation around rights needs improvisation
Ours is a country where almost every six months there are elections due, in some state or the other. Elections for Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Goa, Uttarakhand and Manipur are already due, once they are over, some other states would be ready for elections. Our democracy is so dynamic that every time election approaches, new equations begin to form, opponents become friends and friends starts abusing and cursing each other.
Politicians in our country see the citizens through such lenses that they quickly characterize people into groups. While the parties associated with different casts or religions open up and offer new rights with their respective manifestos, other groups following other ideologies also raise their demand for rights, some in the name of women, some transgender, some in the name of environment etc. Considering the ongoing women empowerment and appeasement, every party has started trying to appear as their well-wisher. Regardless of the ideology they follow and propagate, all the political parties give a special place to the women issues in their respective manifestos. Parties do not want to leave any stone unturned to anyhow draw women in their favour.
Since politics hardly has anything to do with social service, I believe that when politicians try to garner votes by hook or crook; they may be reasonable, but just not correct in their stance! While doing so, they overlook the fact that their undue focus targeting some specific group leaves other groups behind, neglected, thrown out of discussions and debates.
Poor and resourceless men are not part of any discussion
Whichever party emerges victorious after the elections, form the government and pay attention to the group they made promises to and this triggers reactions. These reactions could be slow initially and may get ignored, but in electoral politics, arithmetics that these marginal voices add up to, become tricky very often.
No wonder, many will be surprised, may even shriek and frown to know that the biggest group of marginalised voices today is of Men.
When was it last heard that the government is also planning a scheme for Poor Men? Is arranging for their Education, Employment, Medicine? No doubt, people can say that why do men need such schemes? They have always been in power and decision-making positions! Should we assume men are neither poor, nor resourceless, nor worried about their families, nor unemployed nor have mental health problems?
In today’s scenario, men are portrayed as a villain who has no misery in life! The labourers whom political parties create hue and cry for, the farmers, the poor who commit suicide due to poverty and for whom politicians cry, aren’t they Men? It’s high time, we must realise today is that poor and resourceless men are nowhere in any discourse and it’s comfortably accepted that they deserve to be thrashed and hated.
The phrase ‘All Men Are Alike’ has become such that we’ve ceased to see the distinction in classes. It’s normally portrayed and accepted that men exist only to hurt others, but are Shri Mukesh Ambani and his driver be the same even though they are men? Can the problems of the top officer in some office and the peon who serve him tea and water be of the same kind?
The same yardstick for all?
Factually, for all the people who live in the country, the problems they face and their types, only they can understand and explain. No one can be compared to another, but over the last six decades, feminists and manginas in politics has portrayed the image of men as if they are the only one because of whom the earth has turned into a hell. Had they not been here, everything would’ve been fine.
The biggest problem that boys in general face today is unemployment. And this unemployment results from various other reasons also apart from the economical or government policy issues; today there is no dearth of unemployed men due to the cases of gender-biased laws they are implicated in, numerous deserving men are unemployed due to appeasing reservation policy, today, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has also contributed to the ever-increasing number of unemployed men. Many of those unemployed are the sole bread earners in the household.
Can focusing on some specific section of society solve everything? We must not ignore that even in societies where women themselves are independent and empowered, not all problems have been solved.
The citizens in our country face various kinds of difficulties, but today, ‘favourable’ classes have been segregated in a fashion that even poverty and resourcelessness have been divided for men and women. Having said that, we also must understand that our enraged public debates over our constitutional and fundamental rights accomplish little to address our serious concerns.
Our Save Indian Family Movement, the men’s rights movement of India is an apolitical movement, so we are not associated with any political party. Being apolitical, we promote NOTA in all the elections! But, is this correct and sufficient? Leave aside political parties, when was it last that we aggressively campaigned for common man’s education, employment or medicine? Does being apolitical restrict us from having our own political ideology, definition, aims, standards and bottom lines?
As advocates of men’s rights, it’s incumbent upon us to not only expose leftist and feminist propaganda and ideology to the world but also make good the losses that they have done to the men.
Political parties should also improve and judge people by their character and requirements, and not by their gender, which they won’t be able to do unless they talk about people as individuals. Individuals are far more than their gender or the groups they belong to. People who appear to have similar features aren’t always the same.
We at Save Indian Family Movement seek justice for everyone regardless of gender, hoping that our institutions will work to eliminate injustice wherever it happens. We believe that if people get equal treatment under the law as individuals, they will recognize it and demand it for everyone. Political parties won’t have to divide society into classes and groups.