It's high time to respect the verdict. "No" means no.
Published: Sun 18 Sep 2016, 2:04 PM
Last updated: Sun 18 Sep 2016, 10:33 PM
When the Nirbhaya rape case rocked India in December 2012, one of the questions the "patriarch-ists" raised was: "But... why did a woman have to be out so late - with a man she wasn't married to, and wearing 'western' attire?"
Subtext: a woman who hangs out with men (who are not 'related' to her), stays out late and exhibits a 'westernised mindset' is fair game. She's not only asking for trouble, she's looking for trouble.
Also read | 'Pink' getting incredible attention, immense praise: Big B
Shoojit Sircar's Pink, that released in the UAE on Thursday, turns this dim view on its head like few other films - including Hollywood ones - have done this in this allegedly feminist era.
In that respect, Pink will go down in cinematic history as being THE film that smashed the gender wall. The courtroom drama's defence, addressed magnificently by Amitabh Bachchan - playing Deepak Sehgal, a derelict lawyer who's struggling with depression and wild mood swings - hinges on taking apart the dialectics of perception: if a woman doesn't conform to set stereotypes, she will be commodified - no two ways about it.
Also read | Stills from the movie
The central message is short: "no" means no. If a woman doesn't want to be the subject of a sexual liaison or an act, that's where a man has to draw the line. Has to. Period.
There can be no subjugation, no assertion of masculinity - whether it's a wife or a sex worker, a girlfriend or a casual acquaintance. In the movie, the three women, living together as flatmates (one of them doesn't want to be domiciled with her perfectly nice parents - who live in the same city - simply because she believes in living on her own terms, and there's no fuss generated about this decision) fight the male mindset-dominated system because they are self-admittedly amoral and have no compunctions about deviating from the (again, perceived) "straight and narrow".
Because they're (yet again) 'perceived' as projecting behavioural traits that defy patriarchal conventions, men - smug in their belief that womenfolk from their own families wouldn't "behave" in this manner - take liberties; at times, they get violent; many times, there's sexual assault.
In real life, Big B has recently stated - on the subject of women in his family staying out late: "Yes I am worried. I ask them where are they going and when will they be back. I stay awake until they come back."
It's obviously not the ideal case scenario; we're all looking to exist in an age where no one should have to worry; women shouldn't feel the NEED to be 'protected'.
In Pink, in another show of turning 'Indian' cultural conventional wisdom on its head, the hallmarks of protectionism are blurred. One path-breaking sequence is the one where Minal's father shows up (from the other part of town) when his daughter is arrested for solicitation and attempt to murder; she asks her father to leave, adding she'd rather handle the situation on her own.
Her father looks crushed, but he respects her enough to walk away; of course, he attends the subsequent hearings, sitting quietly in one corner; and there's no hysterical mother breaking down at the idea of the girl-child having brought upon disrepute to the family honour.
Pink has been at the centre-stage of critical acclaim; we don't know whether there the "masses" will be similarly bowled over. Will they be mature enough to handle it?
More importantly, be brave enough to admit it's high time to respect the verdict? "No" means no. And no value judgements please.
iPhone | iPad
Android
Huawei
