Marriages breaking up due to a third party is a common occurrence,In sharp contrast to these men who left their wives for younger beauties, are those who stand tall for having saved their marriages despite deadly temptation.Look around in your immediate vicinity; you will be surprised at the number of highly successful, unmarried women you will notice. Educated, well paid and confident, these women are not willing to lower their standards and make compromises. They even be happy with single lives but come under overwhelming pressure from family to marry. And since all the good (read successful and rich) guys are taken, they do not have much choice.
So it isn’t as if these women go looking for a married man to break up his marriage. These are the only available men who meet their standards. And surely, it is a test of character and of the strength of their marriages whether these men allow The Little Third to enter their sacred space or not.
From repression to fashion statement; from demeaning to determining superiority; from shame to pride, and from sexlessness to a latent sexiness — the veil leaves a confusing trail!
DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said the party was not worried that its rival MCA has been attacking the hudud implementation open warfare between UMNO Deputy President, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and MCA president Liow Tiong Lai
the simple issue of respecting an individual’s religious sensitivity proves that the BN coalition is a 50-year marriage of convenience which is cracking at the seams.Religious extremists and hate groups are putting the country at a crossroads at which point every Malaysian is now taking a second look at what Malaysia has become.
MCA has urged voters in Teluk Intan to vote DAP as a protest against UMNO, for its failure to stop PAS from its hudud implementation agenda.This discussions transported me back to a living room in Beijing a couple of months ago, where the topic of discussion was xiaosan or ‘The Little Third,’ a derogatory term used for women who ‘break up’ homes. The rampant phenomenon of girls brazenly targeting older, rich men has given rise to a fanatic rage amongst women in Chinese social circles. The Chinese are even considering legislation to make The Little Third pay damages for breaking a home!
Muhyiddin had to openly chastise MCA and Gerakan a to respect the choices of an individual, particularly one’s religious beliefs, specifically with regard to the issue of Muslim women “shaking hands” with men. As the Pakatan Rakyat parties have all pointed out, and agreed by Muhyiddin, there are many other issues of importance to discuss in an election, than about hudud implementation
in return, Liow Tiong Lai rebuked Muhyiddin for bringing the issue into the open instead of “communicating through internal channels”. He told reporters yesterday that they could go and tell Muhyiddin what he just said. Instead of putting the issue to a close, he persisted by repeating his claim that “shaking hands” is “good manners”, had bad manners for sticking to her religious beliefs.
The strain between the two race-based parties is completely understandable given that UMNO and MCA seeks only to draw the votes of Malays and Chinese respectively and do not care about the sentiments of the other communities. MCA for example, isn’t bother about the impact of its comments on Malay Muslims because it will do all that is necessary, including playing on the fear of Islam to gain the votes of the Chinese. On the other hand, UMNO will not hesitate to play on the Malay’s fear of losing political power to the Chinese to frighten the Malays into voting for UMNO.
The strategy is failing today because of a more instantaneous and open media catalysed by the online newspapers which transformed the media landscape which was previously controlled with an iron fist by BN.
On the other hand, it is the Pakatan Rakyat parties which have proven itself in slowly but surely disintegrating the racial barriers and silos with its leaders endorsing a Common Policy Platform, and criss-crosses all partyceramahs demonstrating on our ability to speak with a common voice. It is ironical that while the bonds of the 3 parties in Pakatan Rakyat, which is accused of being a marriage of convenience is only getting stronger by the day with increased understanding and cooperation, the Barisan Nasional is tearing at the seams with its leaders unable to see eye-to-eye with each other.
From smart sloganeering to fielding smart professionals and attractive stars, political parties are trying all tricks, but what does the voter really buy?
Whatever the outcome of the elections, what interests me most as an observer of human emotions and behaviour, is the strategies employed by parties to sway voters, and the psychology behind voter behaviour.
In the highly volatile electoral battlefield, as with life, victory belongs to the one who is perceived to be the victor. Everyone likes to support a winner; hence it is critical to project winner vibes (as the BJP is doing), and not give up before you have lost (the Congress seems to have hung up its boots much before they needed to!) A can-do attitude is what gives the winner the swagger that carries him along to victory.
This is followed closely by fanning issues that strongly influence voters’ emotions as well as intellect. All of us are swayed more by emotions than logic, when we vote. Corruption, poverty, illiteracy, lack of infrastructure – studies have shown that negative emotions prod us more into action than positive. We are more likely to step out to vote against a party or candidate, rather than in favour of someone. This is why most advertisements and social media carry negative comments about rival parties and candidates. Fear and anger motivate us more than the hope of good.
Would you believe this – looks too matter! Physical attractiveness plays a part in determining the success of a candidate, popular perception being that beautiful translates to good. However, if this alone were true, who can deny that Rahul Gandhi would win hands down over Narendra Modi? But going beyond, voters also look for someone they perceive as a doer and a transformational leader – one who comes across as strong, trustworthy and action-oriented. And, all said and done, Modi does seem to be more action-oriented than Rahul Gandhi.
A great national hobby is discussing politics, which we do with élan, linking our political ideology strongly to our values. We like to feel part of groups and so naturally who we vote for is also influenced by parents, siblings, lovers, religious leaders and co-workers.
Today, the news we consume through traditional and social media also plays a critical role in influencing our voting impulses. This is more so in an era when our news channels spout more vitriolic rhetoric and heated debates that arouse emotions, rather than sane, objective news reports.
When masses are swayed by the sheer power of rhetoric and biased media reports, sometimes sheer bluster could carry you through to victory – whip a tornado around yourself and it may just carry you to victory. There are many out there just waiting to hang their faith on the first suitable peg. And if you understand this, it is half the battle won.
And where does Arvind Kejriwal fit into all this? Nowhere actually, except in having played the vital role of focusing on the issues that are influencing these elections, and having churned up the cauldron of emotions to boiling point, especially with negativity, which as we said, translates to higher voter turnout!
We have, of course, so far ignored mentioning votes that are bought. As my maid recounted about the last elections, “They came at night and gave a sari, a bottle of liquor and a salwar suit to all homes in our slum. Next day, as I exited the booth, they asked if I had voted for their party. When I said yes, I was handed 500!” Out of curiosity I asked Meena which party had given her the goodies; she did tell me. I just happened to ask her which symbol she had voted for. And what she revealed had me stunned but laughing for days after. She had mistakenly voted for the rival party, while enjoying the bribe from another!
Indeed the veil, which signifies social distancing, trails a fascinating trajectory across cultures, countries and religions and has been rife with varying, often confusing symbolism. Depending on where you live and your social standing, head coverings and veils swing the entire spectrum from being considered a regressive symbol of female segregation and oppression, to symbolising social standing and status. If some communities have used the veil to subjugate women, royalty across cultures has been using head covering as a symbol of status, which lifts them above the commoners.
Then again, whereas most Westerners consider a veil limiting, they have also adopted it as a fashion statement! From Jil Sanders’ veiled beanie and Alexander McQueen’s aviator version of a veil, to simple pieces of black tulle arranged seductively around a hat, veils have managed to create mystique and the standoffish mood that men so love in women. In fact the latest in dressing are “leg veils“ sheer skirts fashioned out of see-through nets and laces.
Moreover, the world believes the veil robs a woman of her identity, but Muslims proudly consider it an announcement of their religious identity. With such contradictions abounding, France’s ban on face covering or veils was naturally open to diametrically opposed interpretations through Western and Eastern perspectives.
Across cultures, the veil has been used to save a woman from a man’s lascivious gaze, and yet a veiled woman arouses a man’s curiosity and interest. Glimpses through a veil tantalise men more than an uncovered face or body. Most of the world sees the veil as dehumanising, while those who wear it see it as a symbol of piety and purity.
Many religions demand that the head be covered in places of worship. Some orders of nuns wear a headdress; Mother Mary too is depicted with her head covered. Muslim men wear skullcaps inside mosques. In Hindu temples and in gurdwaras, it is mandatory to cover the head as a mark of respect to God. In North India, women are told that covering the head is a mark of respect towards elders.
Brides and grooms cover their heads for the wedding ceremony. Christian brides also cover their heads with a veil. However in South India, which escaped the devastating attacks North India faced, the veil is almost non-existent, and for a bride to cover her head is sacrilegious.
Veils and head coverings have, of course, been used for practical and social reasons too. In some places, veils protect the face and hair from sand and heat or the extremities of cold. Veils were even used effectively to announce the marital status of women. Snoods (fitted net material worn to gather hair neatly) were worn by unmarried women in Middle Ages in Scotland and parts of England.
Today, some footballers wear snoods to keep long hair in check. In hotels, chefs and kitchen staff are expected to wear head coverings for hygiene factors.
From repression to fashion statement; from demeaning to determining superiority; from shame to pride the veil does leave a confusing trail. The only thing that makes perfect sense is that the donning or discarding of the veil should be completely the woman’s prerogative, with nobody dictating to her what she should, or should not wear.
A great solution would be if the successful women who already have it all, except a man in their lives, elected to marry down and marry younger – offer an unemployed and not-so-successful guy some privileges. The problem arises when they wish to have it all. For instance, Farah Khan married well, a younger guy with potential — Shirish Kunder — and even gave him a hand up professionally. Now they are happy with their triplets. When Kareena Kapoor linked up with Shahid Kapoor, she too would have ended up giving a leg up to a guy less successful than her; but things didn’t work out between them.
So, how about it, women? Are you game for shifting perspective and looking a bit lower than traditionally acceptable? Choose and nurture men younger than you in time, if you are single and successful, and too ambitious to marry rightaway. Wouldn’t you love to be Sugar Mommies for a change?
No comments:
Post a Comment