Dr. S Elika Assumi I wish to respond to Dr. Asangba Tzüdir’s commentary which was published by your esteemed newspaper on Wednesday, the 14th of November, 2018. I have also read the response which Aheli Moitra has given in the ensuing edition. At the foremost, I must commend Dr. Asangba for raising a pertinent issue (just as Aheli has put it). Although, for me, it seems that there is more than a single issue. I understand his perspectives raised in the first section of the article, but I am at unease with the concluding section. Nonetheless, my response will attempt to hopefully garner a holistic view on some of the key issues raised in both the articles. In Dr. Asangba’s article, I understand that he intended to highlight new narratives in order to shake off “the hangover of patriarchy”; I believe he succinctly directs this point to highlight the urban – rural divide, however to forego any other negotiation with this aspect and to redirect the discourse to a ‘back to the kitchen’ solution is what put me at unease in the first place. Perhaps, the ‘kitchen’ here is equated with the hearth; after all, for the individual all familial, social, cultural and political or moral principles are built around the hearth. However, I find this to be a highly romanticized notion. It could be true for rural areas but I am a thoroughly urbanized individual and to me, I am alright with stating that the kitchen is a space which can be oppressive. I am yet to live in a society where both women and men share the kitchen as an empowering space. The society we live in does not allow that sort of agency, especially to the woman, within the kitchen space; does this mean that wages for housework as Silvia Federici has proposed be a norm? I would say, why not such a radical approach, if the other is an equally radical oppression? In the same vein, why only the ‘kitchen’ as an empowering space for the woman? Why not the bedroom or the dining table? Nonetheless, I agree with Dr. Asangba’s point about the need for new narratives. Keeping a larger aim in mind, if these narratives are intent on striving towards an empowering of the social, political or the economic statuses of women across the broad spectrum of location, society and class, then, one also has to grapple with the immense diversity of backgrounds that constitutes the woman now. Such that, what we desire in one context may change course vastly in another. The same can be said for men after all agency, access to institutional and familial support and the respect of one’s rights is something that every individual desires. Therefore, if a woman chooses the freedom of her career as her economic empowerment, she should be encouraged to do so without the prescription of having to deal with the assumptions around her choice. If the modern woman chooses the domestic space, she is welcome to it and should not be subject to being labelled as unsympathetic or unsupportive of the idea of feminism. Especially, the latter instance is a gathering phenomenon which can be observed in the Nordic countries today, where women are actively choosing the domestic as it seems to offer more individual choices. However, this is the context of the highly modernized societies – not one that applies to the Indian, far less the Naga society. We live in a world that constantly insist on ideological and moral binaries, where the sense of the individual freedom is eroded to a point that one hesitates to engage in dialogue fearing to be cast in one frame or the other, or is confined to the academic space of theory and jargon. Women, and for that matter, men, who may not have the space to express their ambitions, may not have the means to realise their goals, material or otherwise, and the trajectory of their lives suffers the cynical turn to mistrust and disillusion. The question remains, how do we as a society of both men and women come together to contribute in order to create and sustain conditions that encourage and support the rights of all? New narratives are indeed required, to insist on the creation of equal spaces, opportunities but also social perceptions. What a woman chooses need not be bracketed at all, not more so than it is for men. In the same way, when one talks of sensitising men towards the issues of women, respecting their rights and choices, it need not come at the cost of one’s constructed identity, but inspite of it. The masculine and the feminine remain pervasive markers of identity but that does not mean men and women cannot engage in respective relationships and dialogues. The hope is this spirit of accommodation of the other shines forth even in the ideological and political rifts, but more so, the local and personal divide seems to be an easier rhetoric to abide by. We can cite examples of women empowerment in Nagaland where girls score more than boys in the high school state exams, women faculty finding prominence in certain departments of universities and colleges, more female students in certain departments of these very institutions, women self-help groups breaking barriers in some sections of the market economy but the question remains, are conditions actually improving? Although, one cannot deny that many women have benefitted from the change in mentality toward the roles of women in the domestic space and beyond, one cannot refuse to acknowledge the vast number who are still to dream of a life beyond the domestic space and this reality can be met only through increasing awareness and education. However, this is just one context among many, and the willingness to learn and accommodate so much more, new narratives and old, remains the means to understanding the complex issues that persist in the idea behind women’s empowerment, and in the relationship between individuals in a given society. While some may be inclined towards a conservative view, others may choose a more progressive path, the situation of choice as available to the individual, and to be respected for that choice, is the ideal one could hope for in any society. For the moment, I remain sated with this space of dialogue that has allowed me to present my views; as well as my choice not to go back to the kitchen, until such a time when the kitchen can become an empowering space. And this, I feel, we will arrive at only when we engage in open dialogues.
