NETyachaar

This is for all those of us who decided to do an M.A. in Women’s Studies to feel, learn and unlearn concepts in feminism.

Getting here, at the M.A.-pass level, involved two years of drudgeries in the form of assignments, where we used proper citations and merged fancy theories from saat samundar paar; and three years of passing B.A. examinations, where we were trained to do repeat telecasts of our views in rather sustainable ways.  For me, there was also two years of junior college, where I studied Arts; I was expected to write two pages for 5-marks answers. So basically, the minds of us, social science students, are mostly subjective in nature.

We cannot be blamed. How can we possibly enumerate social, cultural and political phenomena in one, two, three and four? As for solutions and analyses of these phenomena, there are no multiple choices really! If only it was that easy! We would just go like, “Kya? Casteism in India? Uma Chakravarti, point number one, material and social basis hai iska. Aur haan, solution, Ambedkar ka option number one try karo, abolish it.” Sigh. It’s not like that, no? How can we reduce the problems of the elaborate human existence to simplistic points?

Coming back to the post for today, I, following the traditional bhed chaal, like a good social science student decided to appear for the National Eligibility Test for Lectureship today. It’s what you do, after M.A., basically.

I learned some very interesting concepts while answering the paper today. This is what I learned from the stuff in Paper I, the common one for everybody. Here goes:

1. As against the “popular view” of towns and cities in developing countries and of urbanization, which makes environmental degradation, generation of slums and squatters, poverty, etc. forth; we need to see how the world has, in fact, coped so well.

2. Conversing with the spirits and ancestors is termed as transpersonal communication.

3. True can sometimes be spelt ‘ture,’ by the power vested in you by the UGC. It is not necessary to do typographical checks always.

Now, I shall discuss my most favorite subject: Women’s Studies. We are expected to know the exact differences between all the different kinds of feminisms. Especially, in the curious case of Marxist and Socialist feminisms, that tends to overlap across theory and praxis. Then, raising feminist  consciousness turns out to be the sole concern of radical feminists only. Also, radical feminism is called ‘ugrawadi nariwaad’ in Hindi. This, I like. It makes me want to become radical actually. A very important thing that all Indian feminists must know is the names of the Chairpersons for the National Commission for Women because they’re the ‘karta-dharta’ of feminist concerns in India. Since they run out of questions related to women, they want to ask us questions related to children’s schemes. The stereotypical putting together of women and children, is eternalized. Knowing that Ekta Kapoor has something to do with TV Serials is an integral component of feminist knowledge. The patriarchy and gender roles shown in her TV Serials should be incentive enough for us feminists to not let her shadow fall on our political space. No? Then, being proud about successful women like Indira Nooyi and yet caring for things like feminization of poverty and other socialist concerns can exist in the same space. If not the same space, the same question paper, for sure!

Lastly, it is not important for me to know shit about the DV Act or the Mexico Conference, as long as I have by-hearted that the former was passed in 2005 and the latter was conducted in 1975. Also, it doesn’t matter what Simone de Beauvoir wrote in ‘The Second Sex’ as long as I remember her name, the name of the book she wrote and that famous quote that says, “One is not born a woman, but rather becomes one.”  Also, concepts like glass ceiling and sexual harassment at work place and be explained by two lined reasons and assertions, apparently. To pass this exam with flying colors, I need not read the books that were written; I just need to know who wrote it. The political leaders who’re women, like Mayawati, Mamta didi, Jaya aunty, and Krishna Tirath – I must know details of their tenure in important government offices. It doesn’t matter if they didn’t utter one word in feminist spirit.

This exam is stupid. For those of us who have the fire in our bellies and want to genuinely teach things to the future generations – there is immense struggle. Beware. We cannot afford to let such examinations happen when we are able to influence change. Until then, I am hoping to be lucky with NET, next time. I will mug up all these stupid details of names and dates and what-not.

Don’t consider this a case of sour grapes. It’s just a deep rooted resentment that’s brimming up. This examination seems to make Women’s Studies reiterate certain ideas that aren’t exactly feminist. We are people of words, reason, emotion, theory, practice and praxis. How can we be restricted to multiple choice questions and answers? I dislike these structures and systems that coerce us to behave.

Closing comment: it would be nice to have an ‘ugrawaadi’ system of education.

And if you’d like to, listen to this: The Wall.