How low is too low? - Dressing up or dressing down?

 
Exposed to the elements of globalization in terms of dialects, cuisines, culture and fashion- our country has expanded its boundaries in all dimensions. We have come out from the closets of tradition to embrace the contemporary.  In the process, we have progressed through many avenues, creating milestones that have added feathers to our cap.

The leap ahead and the fall backwards

Ostensible as the progress may be, it  has not encompassed the society as a whole. The mindset of the Indian is still grappling with the transition; while being stuck in the clichés, norms, rigidity of the societal framework. The divide(in all planes), the disparity, the gender-bias manifest  with its ugly face.  They act on polar opposites, like the male and female of the species, who never conjoin and eventually threaten to tear the world asunder.

 

The male, the female and the clichés

 The crux of the issue originates in the male/female of thought and action,  the discrimination and prejudices, associated with the female, that has never evolved with the changing times.  Women, like in olden times,  are still bound by the confines of the societal rules, which were veiled behind blind-beliefs/superstitions/heirloom traditional practices.

 
Dress-sense- The crust- to-core mismatch with the male-sensibility

As, we the women, step out from behind  the veils, to the new era of education, emancipation and empowerment,  there is more than wolf-calls that we battle against. We confront the hybrid and hypocritical Indian male’s mindset- the typical being the much debatable dress-codes and their provocative aspects. Here is how the jagged male territory operates with respect to the dressing of its female counterparts, who are objectified suitably for violating their own modesty:

• Low necks and deep neck: . Forget the sweltering heat, which scorch during the peak of summer or the dire need to go airy. Our need for oxygen by not being strait-jacketed,  doesn’t sync-up with the male’s perception of low-necks. For them, it is one bend  farther from what “cleaves”  the “buxom” from the “slate”, the “laced” from the “un-laced”  and natural from the subterfuges. Our notion of feeling free is neck-tied by males, who only view neck-deep
• Low waist & Low hip:  The curves, the midriff and the belly-button accentuate femininity. But not so for everyone. Where our intentions would be to streamline these naturally feminine with the latest in fashion, the typical male mind would be tuning to numbers of the hip and hop; to jive and dive(towards the nearest possible and grab-able mate). Not to mention, the whole get-up being imagined in the wild wind or under heavy downpour, and romance coming live in filmy style.

 

• The see-through and the shorts:  While we emphasize on transparent relationships, we demote the  wearing of transparent clothing. According to aged wisdom “the transparent” is worse than nudeness and in the eyes of the male – its sheer waste of clothing and draping- may as well have been….done without(Come to think of it, trying a new fabric which doesn’t confirm to modesty can send the scandal sheets running up to pages). As for shorts, whether it is several inches or feet above the knee – it is something showy and has to be gawked at. This is when the male (even the one with least poetic sensibility) takes flight with vivid imagery.  Soulful expressions fill the air with regard to how the revealed legs are – from the hairy-scary to silken smooth; potato to pineapples legs and the rare slim ‘n’ slender, there is never a time, when shorts fall short of running commentary() .   Short-skirts with a nice flare are no less than a treat for  riveted eyeballs and open-mouthed drool, one that would have given Marlyn Munroe a run for her money.

 

The shameless, the shamed or the shameful?

Provocative, vulgar, obscene…the  classification of immodest clothing can go on. Nevertheless, it doesn’t justify the objectification of women for satiating the male. 

It is not just the male eyes, which keep ogling at the “immodest”. This expanse of the regressive-minded  covers the old  school of thought  as well, which include women, who tut-tut even at a seven year old wearing cycling shorts, or  discuss in hushed tones about the other “female” who has no sense about her flab, while flaunting it  with “boldness”.

Dressing up or dressing down

What fails to be understood is that the concept of Dress-sense too has evolved from being the mere layer to cover up nudeness to representing one’s individuality.  Just, as  women are no longer  the female of the species who hang around for mating calls and settles down for mothering the litter of her mate.  What is revealed or what is concealed is entirely one’s individual choice, as long as the tastes are in sync with the occasion. Of course, a string bikini would be as much odd at a wedding  function as an empress clothing for a beach party.  Or, to suit the hypocritical standards of the otherwise men, you can’t be donned in the traditional 9-yards saris in the confines of a kitchen and burst  out open in a flimsy chiffon material, to the night club. There has to be a bit of balance between individual and society;  tradition and modernity and, especially  in the bi-polarized mindset of the Indian male, which views  “other” women as objects of desire, while seeking to keep their own female brethren behind veils of protection. 

Should we be mummified remains of the janitor-society?

Stepping out strait-jacketed is not going to stop the wolf-whistling(who knows even strait-jackets may have loopholes only visible to the scanning eyes of a man). Nor is it going to reform the way the male thinks of the female.  On the contrary,  head-to-toe cover-up(like the Egyptian mummies) only incite the roving eyes to probe further, to dig deeper to see as to what could be beneath those layers. To combat the male dominance and the chauvinistic attitude of the society, both the male and the female of the human species should reorient their mindset to the evolving, the emerging and the empowering role of women in the modern scenario. After all, we have come a long way from:  stark nakedness to modesty,  animal hides to chic clothing,   mating to companionship,   the male to the manly…should it then take much time, thought and space for a perspective shift from a female to the woman?

 

Committed?

 The kumkum on her forehead glistened under the golden rays of the sun. It also clearly partitioned (the red partition )her emotional space into the individual and the role-bound. Yes, Kusum was past her thirties and tethered carefully to her duties at home and work.

As part of her weekly-routine, she was rummaging her cupboard, which had piles of clothes, hanging, dangling and slinging in the most disorderly fashion. She sighed on the mess and horde of chores that lay before her. She reflected.

The space that she and her husband had built and nurtured together was live with energy, with kids who had become the focal point of all their attention.  But then, there was something  stifling, which she feared would  suck down her individuality, into a whirlpool of exacting responsibilities.

She had her life-partner whom she could count on but in the daily bustle of other duties, their mutual relationship did not enjoy ample space!

The male, the female and marriage

And, on those lines, her train of thought  headed towards the institution of marriage. Hers was an arranged marriage. All that she knew about her then would-be was his family-background, his qualifications, financial earnings(to determine sustainability for running a family) andl, other aspects of character and behaviour that confirmed to societal norms. Her parents did not go to the extent of hiring private detectives(which some of her friends’ parents did to certify the credentials of their prospective groom) to cross-check and confirm the candidature of their would-be son-in-law. They went by hearsay of trustworthy sources and deemed him the ideal fit for their darling daughter. The other factors should, according to her parents, snugly fit in, within these critical parameters, which were important for sustaining a marital relationship. After all, Kusum’s parents married and were still married, on that foundation.

Yes, she was bound as was her husband  in this relationship called marriage – the one that would give her anchorage during troubled times,  make her step into challenging roles and lead a “fulfilling” life. But she wondered whether the alignment was perfect?

 The one-to-one with the marital vows

From the tiny ant to the giant whale, survival of the species, was the primary urge for mating and reproduction.  To achieve this purpose, the male would just pick on any female of its species,  and simply lay on the other to accomplish the mission it had set for. The slightly evolved would of course, engage in foreplay  to attract and stimulate the female before performing the final cosummation. Well, as the wanderers of the wild, there were no marital ties, to bond these quadrupeds into a definitive relationship.
But as humans evolved, the need to set up an institution was realized to bring about orderliness and some organization in the system.  What was the genesis of this system?

Polygamy was in vogue, legalizing the man to have many wives and to equate, polyandry too was accommodated…Here, Kusum’s  thought processes came to an abrupt halt. She had often read about extra-marital affairs, live-ins, pre-marital sex and other aspects that vowed to defile the sanctity of a marital relationship. Was the transition to the strict one-to-one relationship between a male and female in the physical, moral and emotional plane, more of an imposition of society than being instinctive?
You could keep your senses under check, your body under control but would that guarantee that the emotional space of your partner is meant exclusively for you?


The male-psyche and the female synchronization

All through her upbringing in  a conservative Brahmin Family, Kusum was taught about the  significance of being a woman and how naturally accommodative women are supposed to be with respect to their men, family and society. In fact, while pregnant, her very own gynaec, would educate her about the exemplifying qualities of women- their natural ability to synchronize their orbit with men, come what may!  The virtue of acceptance, her doc would say was the greatest, for a woman.
Being a non-conformist and a punk rebel right from a young age, Kusum would argue at length with her elders about the whole framework and that it doesn’t create space for love- only quashes women to submit and surrender for namesake, whether they are emotionally committed or not.

She would even contest   the male-readiness for it? Leaving aside the fact that males sized-up any one being clad in a tinge of femininity, how conditioned was the male mind to embrace the institution of marriage? 

 Evolution- when one female was not enough to keep her man happy!

Evolution has traced the male footprints with that of females and going by the evidence, they were not bound to the exclusive one of the opposite sex. The king of the jungle, for instance, would always be festooned with many lionesses. Yesteryear ancestors of royal descent added pride to their family, by winning over other territories and bringing in more wives to the clan. It was always “the more, the merrier”, when it came to men, who established  their political dominance, physical prowess and potent as a virile male.
And yet, the solemnized bonding  of  a relationship came into being, to maintain a sense of  system,  a framework becoming of the evolved to maintain harmony, dignity, integrity and fidelity in a relationship.

Was it then constricting their  emotional space, curtailing their sense of being to grow into a full-fledged masculine entity, to be bonded with just one woman?

Kusum mulled and asked herself, “How much had she reconciled to this principle and premise of marriage?” she had had her own share of discord and disputes in the relationship, which had left her in despair. She too had secretly empathized and admired women who broke free from the clichés to stand up for themselves.
Her husband too, she felt was tied to the same rigidity. At the most, he would give way to forgivable indulgences in flirting or exercising chivalry for women left in the lurch. She would even ask him jokingly  “What if you get attracted to another woman?” or, “What if we outgrow the passion for each other?”. After all, the fact lay bare, that humans did have their animal instincts, which were only subdued by rigorous discipline.  Her husband would always shrug it off, as one of Kusum’s wild ramblings, saying that once tied to a discipline better abide by it, than straying off and bearing the burden of guilt for the rest of your life.

GUILT  as the “elephantiasis of the conscience”  
But Kusum was still at war with herself. She knew that more than the wrong it was the guilt of doing the wrong, which was the prime-killer. How did those involved in extra-marital affairs survive the guilt? She had known of close chums’ husbands, with the same background of upbringing, who had chosen this route for “better-life”. Or did they simply seek adventure out of the whole thing- the thrill of being able to break free, vent out their frustrations  and be happy?

Was being guiltless the answer to being liberated and feeling happy? Guilt sensitized us to the existence of our fellow beings, and enforced the discipline for peaceful coexistence. But overblown guilt also deprived us of little pleasures of life.

Did, then, the laws of marriage also have a hidden clause of guilt erupting with the failure to abide by it? Did men fear it?

Casanova to the householder to the ascetic 

The transformation from a Casanova to the ascetic, does not happen without getting satiated with the desire for the female!  The Casanova with his aimless pursuits and quests does seek the anchorage of a stolid woman, who would help him sail through thick and thin, to help him finally retire to his home, rest-assured.  There is security that fastens your needs and guarantees comfort. There is the shock-absorber effect with being home-bound, even if the home is not flooded by a diversity of females.  There are males who cling to this principle and carry forward with their family, thereby testifying for the stability of the institution of marriage.
And there are those, who feel that the terms and conditions of marriage are far too binding for their wild west wind spirit. They would rather sweep every other woman off their feet, make out, and set forth on their journey without the remnants of the past. They prefer being rootless. The same applies to the new-genre of liberated women, who would rather break the mould than giving shape to it, by rushing with the changing times and plunging into adventures, which would only plummet them into the abyss.

Redeemed from the past, challenging biological instincts

While thinking hard over these aspects, Kusum got hold of some hand-written letters(three, that she had received ) from the cupboard, which had the faint odour of the past. Those letters had extolled her poetic skills, which were published in national dailies and had also won her a prize.
The letters were beautifully worded, an expression, which would have made Kusum fall head-over-heels in love with a  person who could take time out to discern her personality through her poems. Same wavelength, sensitivity, insightfulness…He could have been the man, Kusum had fancied in her dreams and she would have loved to see it materialize to reality had she not been a marriage and two kids too late. Even though the individual in her had swayed to step beyond the other side of the red  partition, to have it her way, there was something that held her back, at that point in time.

Conformed ,  conditioned, or Committed?

Kusum’s was a marriage where two people from diverse backgrounds, value-systems, principles had come together. On their premise, it was difficult even for  perceptions to coexist on the most critical issues.
Going by the evolutionary biological aspects of the male and the female, both  she and her husband had  had  their temptations to be led astray from their marital arrangement, go seeking   a mate, who would suit their tastes and be perfectly in-sync with their individual mindsets. Yet, there was something else that proved to be a stronger binding force in their relationship, which transcended physical attraction,  like-mindedness or the emotional security besought in a marriage.

The infatuations, mid-life crises she (and probably her husband too) had been through were those passing-phases, where one did not drop the anchor or stop by in the journey towards fulfilment.

Mutual sustainability of marriage, she realized was not just being agreeable on every issue.  But creating a common path between the individual spaces of each partner, that would align perfect with the common vision. Yes, the answer was in being committed to the common goals of a partnership.
Kusum wondered, if she had had to marry her own  living image in terms of mindset, personality, would she have evolved in terms of personhood? She had imbibed a bit of her hubby in herself, as much as he had taken in, a part of her. And, this had been possible only because both of them  accepted and were committed to the “one-to-one”  principle of the marital  space- exclusive to each other in all planes.

Those appreciative, hand-written letters, which she beheld, did remind her of the old Kusum and her wild spirit. But they were similar to flying kites, blowing with the current,   with no distinct trails but just strings pulled and steered, and ultimately breaking-free into nothingness!
Kusum  sought anchorage in the terra-firma, stability and rooting, to nurture and be nurtured. She attained these through the mutual marital space, which provided for her, helped her grow,  branch out and flower to greater heights, as hers, his and theirs truly, surely and purely.