Every time I read about feminist activism in India I can’t help but start to get really excited and want to jump up and down and point and say, loooook, look what they are doing! But you can’t really help it when a group of women get together in pink saris, call themselves a gang and fight against injustices done to their communities.
Meet the Gulabi gang, via BBC.
The pink women of Banda shun political parties and NGOs because, in the words of their feisty leader, Sampat Pal Devi, “they are always looking for kickbacks when they offer to fund us”.
Two years after they gave themselves a name and an attire, the pink women have thrashed men who have abandoned or beaten their wives and unearthed corruption in the distribution of food grains for the poor.
They have also stormed a police station and thrashed a policeman after they took in an untouchable man and refused to register a case.
Now I will say the story itself is alright, but it is always a little annoying when reporters put in their sexist, infantilizing two cents. I mean I was willing to look over the fact that they called the leader “feisty.” When are aggressive men ever called feisty? But then to further qualify this tone, he goes on.
The pink sorority is not exactly a group of male-bashing feminists – they claim they have returned 11 girls who were thrown out of their homes to their spouses because “women need men to live with”.
That is also why men like Jai Prakash Shivhari join the “gulabi” gang and talk with remarkable alacrity about child marriages, dowry deaths, depleting water resources, farm subsidies, and how funds are being stolen in government works.
Why are women that work for the rights of other women labeled as potentially male bashing? I am going to assume as this is written in the Indian and British media that this description is greatly influenced by Western feminisms bad PR that made it overseas. Either way, amazing story.
Thanks to Katherine for the link.
OK back to my male bashing. . .
12 Comments
I love how a man getting involved proves it’s all okay…
Yes, this was really heartwarming when i cam across this story yesterday.
Infact, when I read about these grassroots campaigners in India- or anywhere in the third world, who accomplish so much, with the shackles imposed on them, I wonder what race they are- for human they are not, something beyond indeed. These veiled warriors.
also, why did they have to call it a “pink sorority.” ok, we get it, THEY’RE LADEEEZ.
anyway, an encouraging story despite the poor reporting.
This is one of the most heartening things I have read in a long time. Thank you so much for posting it.
I have always wondered why women *don’t* do this. So it is absolutely awesome to see that some of them do.
But yeah, boo on the stupid reporting. Fighting for justice = man-hating? You know, it’s not *our* fault that worldwide, so many men are scumbags. I like hearing that some men have joined the women in their quest for justice because it reaffirms that yes, men are human too, not universally scum, but the notion that if there were no men present to validate the group’s existence they would *have* to be an anti-male vigilante group is just bloody stupid.
Truly inspiring. It’s amazing what people can do when they work together in the face of opposition.
It is awesome that they’re standing up for the rights of women in a misogynistic culture but…am I the only one whose a little disturbed at the use of words like “gang,” “thrashing” and “attacked”? Maybe those are just the words that the reporter chose, but I don’t condone violence as a means to an end.
Normally I wouldn’t advocate violence as a means to an end either, but I think there are some cases in which that’s necessary. Considering that (from what I’ve read) corruption in India’s power structures is so widespread it’s considered normal — common wisdom is that the best way to get something done is to bribe an official — I can see how vigilantism could be part of the solution.
“But yeah, boo on the stupid reporting. Fighting for justice = man-hating?”
The article writer seemed to be specifically *not* calling them male-bashers and wanted to make sure the readers got that point too (in case they didn’t already get it from the “They have also stormed a police station and attacked a policeman after they took in an untouchable man and refused to register a case” part).
Thene, I agree with you. It’s all ok once men are involved. We do need their stamp of approval!
It’s the writing that’s at fault here of course – men DO need to be involved in feminist action, or at least to engage with it. But to imply that these women are not male-bashing or feminists because men are involved – well, it’s nonsense for a start…
Also: women = pink, angry about domestic violence only(ok, and untouchables)
Men = oh, all sorts of things, the environment, corruption… they have a much wider perspective. Of course.
I also object to the idea that the women are not feminists because they return women who have been thrown out of their homes … with no mention at all of the potential context of being thrown out (the involvement of extended families, not just husbands, the increased vulnerability of women outside marriage, honour killings etc etc) or any acknowledgement that there are different feminisms.
Ah well. It seems a shame that in Gandhi’s country it is no longer feasible to enact change through peaceful process, but so be it.
It’s all about watching the gulabi gang state their own policies and sing their songs on film. The passion and persistence of their cause is wonderful. Also interesting perspectives by men- some ARE v supportive. Anyway check the link below to a ten min documentary about these women. I think they’re incredible. http://current.com/items/88939424/gulabi_gang_the_pink_women_of_india.htm
Activity of international poolers The main object of the international pool was the distribution all over the world through affiliated news agencies of pictures taken in those main venues where cameramen of the pool alone were admitted.
It was, of course, essential that the international pool photographers should take the pictures of competitors of all nationalities. The composition of the international pool, therefore, was intentionally quite international, including 105 members from five corporations: (viz. AP, UPI, Time-Life, Keystone and EPU). These consisted of one coordinator who was in charge, one secretary, 20 cameramen, 10 desk personnel, 8 caption writers, 35 darkroom personnel, 10 liaison men, etc., and this group was provided with 10 motorcycles and 8 motorcars.
At previous Olympic Games only three international news agencies at the most have taken part with perhaps half the number of pool photographers. Necessary expenses were borne equally. Each news agency contributed $5,500 making a total of $27,500, to cover the expenses for the 55 cameramen who were temporarily employed in Japan, the cost of films, chemicals and other materials, motorcars, motorcycles, but excluding the travelling expenses to Japan for those members of the pool despatched by the respective news agencies.
The collection of material by the pool was interesting in that colour photographs of almost all the events were taken, and further that, like monochrome photographs, those in colour were developed in the dark rooms in the National Stadium. The volume of work was much larger than had been expected.
The pool’s work was begun on 10th October, the day of the Opening Ceremony. It was not surprising that over 100 pictures were produced on that day, followed by a daily average of 150 pictures, to reach 232 at the climax. In addition, on an average more than 300 rolls of films a day were sent in to be treated by the more than 30 persons who were kept fully occupied. By virtue of its particular composition, being a combined corps of veteran reporters and cameramen from all over the world, the international pool proved a most successful factor to the photographer recording of the Olympic Games in Tokyo.