Response to Latha Ramakrishnan...
By Nadchaththiran Chevinthianne
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
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
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..