To Progressive Men,

I cannot begin a letter with “dear”. For decades we have been comrades in many battles where we have fought shoulder to shoulder. We have been daughters and fathers, brothers and sisters, spouses, lovers and most importantly friends who have valued each other’s convictions and stood in each other’s corners. And still.

On August 6, the Bombay High Court reversed the 2021 acquittal by the Additional Sessions Court Mapusa, of Tarun Tejpal, the former editor of Tehelka, and sentenced him to ten years in jail for sexually assaulting a junior colleague in an elevator.

The first remarks by Tejpal to hit the press included the fact that he was 62 years old, had a wife, and was being politically victimised like the incarcerated activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam – who, unlike Tejpal, are languishing in jail for over six years without even the hint of a trial. And immediately some of you, our friends, turned rape apologists.

From expert opinions on the survivor’s failure to look like a person who has just been sexually assaulted to contemplations on the Rashomon nature of the judgements of the two courts with “amusing facts” making for good cinema – social media is abuzz.

You did not look up the definition of rape and yet doubted its occurrence. You did not consider the past 13 years of the survivor’s life as she bravely confronted character assassinations and yet questioned her integrity.

The chimera of the “ideal survivor” invoked regularly at rape trials has haunted this one too. Judges and counsel routinely rely on unwritten social scripts of how an ideal survivor should look, feel, and react. What they have done before and after the assault, whether they have gone about their usual routine, drunk alcohol, laughed, and looked “normal” determines the veracity of their statement. Even their sexual history, lifestyle and personal choices are considered.

From the Mathura rape case of 1972 till now, not much has changed in how in fact the survivor is put on trial. The weight of the burden stops many women from reporting sexual assault. You know this, and yet you bring this up.

The most infuriating device to protect this person because he shares your ideology is the regurgitation of the conspiracy theory that the entire case is framed by the fascist party. You not only give a clean chit to Tejpal, but actually signal that the survivor may be in cahoots with those carrying political vendetta. If you insist there are two narratives, it is your bias that makes you choose the one to believe.

But we are done with your excuses of the “feeble no”; the lack of an “ideal” survivor; or this continuous mention of political reprisal, which seems to have become the loudest catchphrase in misdirection. We, women and other non cis-het folks are currently neck deep in several struggles against fascism, and none of us need the Tejpal case as a means to that end. You don’t either. Let it remain just what it is – the case of a sexual assaulter.

Your response is disappointing, even disgusting, but unfortunately not surprising, say most of us. I remember the distinguished scholar Susie Tharu had once said that our toughest wars are those where people we are confronting are also people we love, return home with. I feel our strongest feelings of betrayal too lies there – with you.

We know patriarchy is alive and thriving among the right wing – we don’t expect better. But when we see it in our most intimate personal and political spaces, it is heart-breaking. But we also know that in the zero-sum game of priority politics of left progressives, we feature, if at all, at the lowest point in the scale that determines gravity and relevance of matters that need attention. It has always been the wrong time to raise issues that have been of importance to us including violence against women and queer bodies.

Women working within the organised left have been firmly and routinely told that the concerns they raise might impair the arrival of the scheduled revolution hurtling down. And chided for being selfish. Especially when the perpetrator is from the male quarters of the same groups, it is almost impossible to aspire for justice. While broligarchy may be taking over the world, left-pro-bros closer home work hard to protect each other.

In the past few years I have noticed how quickly you have brought back renowned men accused of Me Too to the cultural life of our society. You chastise those who welcome right-wing rapists with garlands, but unfurl the red carpet of lit fests, seminars and award ceremonies for accused men with left-liberal leanings. Any criticism of this brings forth a tirade against “cancel culture” from you, albeit bolstered with support from some women.

The case for restoring the former glory of these accused as “talented” agents of freedom and justice is legitimised with the rhetoric that they have suffered too long for minor errors of judgement. What is ignored is that including them in social spheres automatically excludes those who have accused them, both by the sheer presence of their perpetrators in these spaces as well as being unwelcome at these events.

Like remaining apolitical is only a politics of silence that strengthens dominance, your dismissal of cancel culture ultimately cancels out the survivors. In both cases the real problem is alignment with power.

Perhaps you are wondering if we are still friends. Well, our sisterhoods have taught us well. We believe that as we live, we learn and transform – first ourselves and then the world. In that order and not one without the other. It is time that our friendship with you, our co-travellers, be more demanding.

You could learn from those who fight against fascism, casteism, patriarchy and bigotry without sacrificing one for another. They negotiate conflicts with diligence and honesty. To start with, you will have to call out the sexual assaulters among your friends no matter how “brilliant” or “gifted” or “revolutionary” they may be.

The feminist and Dalit movements have taught us that ideas like “merit” or “excellence” are contextual and subjective with nothing universal about them. The definitions we have inherited have been created by Brahmanical patriarchy and capitalism for their vested interest. It is time that you who declare your political solidarity with us redefine these words to include care, introspection, and self-critique.

And instead of struggling with a pause after “brilliant but”, call a sexual assaulter just what he is – a sexual assaulter.

From,

A Feminist.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.