By Nadchaththiran Chevinthianne

Latha Ramakrishnan’s thoughtless response is shocking and shameless. Because her prosaic language of the old Colonial English has a lot of pathetic jargons and her voice is ultra conservative. Her arguments are flawed and incoherent. She didn’t understand Thanya’s article at all. Let us analyse some of her comments.

1. “it is wrong to say that women writing poetry  face undue  suppression. On the other hand  as things stand today it is comparitively (sic) easier for women in this field to gain attention and recognition.”

2. “can't mr.brammarajan write his views on  the poetry of any woman? For that matter any discerning reader has the freedom to air his or her views. That doesn't make one a fascist or  fundementalist. (Sic) But that is exactly how such reviewers  are projected paired alongwith those who  decry women maliciously  and with ulterior motives.”

3. “It is argued that centuries after centuries women who took to writing were suppressed. May be true, but then history is twofold-the history of the past and the history of the present. The past injustices meted to women in the field of literature are 'things of the past.'. Today , being ten against hundred ( and, four or five being the select few among the ten) the survival and the limelight  are easier to reach for women than for men who write good poetry.”

4. “Today's world and its power-system exploit and oppress men also in numerous ways.”

As you can read through these you can see Latha Ramakrishnan is representing Mr. Pramarajan and male chauvinism thus playing a defence barrister.

Women who are writing poetry in women - language do face harassment and organised assaults. Tamil Nadu is the hot bed for these attacks as it is   still more or less has the value system of a Feudal society.  Sri Lanka including its Tamil regions is more modernised than Tamil Nadu. (An intriguing way to explain the difference between feudal and a modernised society is through Concubine Keeping and Womanising. A successful chief minister of Tamil Nadu can be an active Concubine Keeper whereas a successful president of Sri Lanka can be career womaniser.). There has been a boom of feminist literature in Tamil for some years. Many of the women writers have been under active attack from Male chauvinism. Salma, Kutty Revathy, Uma Maheswary are a few victims to name. ( Ambai had been a constant target of abuse and harassment for decades because of her writings and convictions)  In fact the review written by Premmarajan for Kutty Revathy’s collection is a “civilised” way of an assault on women- writing.  Saying that it is easier for women to get attention and recognition is an out of perspective statement. All that attention and recognition women get these days  (if any) are those they deserve and had been denied them for centuries.
 
Freedom of expression can be often abused.  We can still allow people to say things like “ Tamils are the second class citizens of Sri Lanka”   “ Women are less intelligent than men as their brain size is half the size of a men” “ India is for Hindus only”. When a lot of people adopt these dangerous convictions, it is not good for the welfare of the humanity.  What Mr. Prammarajan dictates in his review to Revathy’s collection are exactly fascist and fundamentalist statements.  Brammarajan doesn’t have breast, clitoris, or G-spot. In his lifetime he is never going to experience a multi- orgasm. Then why is he trespassing into the foreign territory of female sexuality? It is simply none of his business.
 
Latha Ramakrishnan should be clear of the distinction between the women who are writing and the women who are writing in feminist or women language. Both are not the same. Ramanich Chandran, Anuradha Ramanan or even Latha Ramakrishanan may well fit into the first category.  These “women” writers wouldn’t be suppressed, as they do not challenge male chauvinism.  In fact they are very much encouraged by the male lobby. 
 
Things like racism, male chauvinism did exist in history and they are concrete facts. You cannot write things like “ May be true” “ May be true Hitler annihilated some six million Jews”.  Can we say, “May be Latha Ramakrishnan is a woman”?  Of course she is a woman. 

“Today's world and its power-system exploit and oppress men also in numerous ways.”  -Latha Ramakrishnan.

Can Ms Ramakrishnan give any evidences for this statement? To me this statement looks like something written by a year 10 student. Men are exploited nowhere in the world because they are men. However women are.  

I want to ask Ms Ramakrishnan a few questions. 

Q1. Why penis is not removed from a living man in any culture whereas clitoris is removed from a living woman in some African culture? (Please, do not equal this to male circumcision. Because it is the penis, which is homologous with the clitoris and not the male foreskin.)

Q2.  As for male “womaniser” what is for female?  OR Why is “Nymphomaniac” a politically incorrect word whereas “womaniser” is not?  OR As for female “Nymphomaniac” what is for male? 

Q3. Why men are not used in prostitution and 99.99% of the prostitutes are women? (I am not classifying male under 18 children, used in prostitution as men) OR Why It is only less than 0.0000001% of brothels where man is the service provider and woman is the client. 

Q4. Why even in the first world countries women corporate executives are earning less than their male counterparts? 

Q5. Why in most of the countries half of the Members of Parliaments are not women and why US has never produced a female president?

I have no hesitation to call Latha Ramakrishnan, a part time woman agent, working as an advocate of Male chauvinism..

aruno@hotmail.com