Why my Feminism and the Sabarimala ruling mismatch!

My paternal grandmother was a formidable, Nair matriarch. She ruled her terrain with an iron will. She had 6 boys, my dad being the youngest. One of my earliest childhood memories is of the huge family get togethers we had at her place during Onam and Vishu, the huge sumptuous sadyas (traditional feasts). The pecking order at her place was set - the children first, the menfolk and then the women. As the youngest in the huge brood of cousins, this did not really strike me until once, when somehow a few more of us turned up for lunch and she ordered that the boys be given priority over girls in seating for lunch. I vividly remember 6 - 7 year old me marching upto her and saying, " Ammoomma, unless you seat us kids altogether, I refuse to eat your lunch. The boys are no better than us". She was taken aback for an instant, then smiled. We got to eat together and then on many other occasions she told me, as a compliment, I'm like her. This also meant I got an extra two rupee note as Vishu Kaineettam (cash given as traditional gift to younger ones on Vishu).

I tell you this story to say I'm not anti-feminist. I do not hold onto archaic values just in the name of tradition. People who know me brand me as outspoken and persistent on gender parity. But, I oppose the current Supreme Court order on women entering Sabarimala.

Before you raise those cudgels, let me also tell you, I do not buy those stories of Lord Ayyappa being a brahmachari and hence averse to women. Neither, do I believe that a woman entering the temple will invoke divine wrath and an apocalypse. I will not simplify or downgrade an entity I believe in as part of my faith, into a vengeful, threatening monster.

I oppose this because it is part of a belief system close to my heart. The same as the one that makes me light an oil lamp at sunset, the same as the one that makes me put my palms together as token of repect when I say my prayers, the same as the one that invokes spirituality when I smell the fragrance of camphor, incense sticks and jasmine flowers. I oppose this because I do not in anyway see it as something that either harms my rights as a woman or improves my status as a human.

It definitely is not the same as the caste system that divided humanity into sects and deemed some as untouchables. It does not dehumanise me, it does not marginalise me. It is definitely not the same as the Sati or the dowry system. And, definitely not like the landmark legislation set rolling by the Channar Lahala. It does not empower me.

I oppose this because I see the whole episode as a drama orchestrated by people who understand none of the sentiments/emotions associated with the belief system. If they did, then they would've completed a pilgrimage of Vaishnodevi and all the other temples before they zeroed in on Sabarimala. They would've been aware of the existence of 'Attukaal' and participated in the annual festival that exclusively celebrates womanhood. They would've been aware of the Chengannur Mahadeva temple with its celebrations revolving round the Devi idol that menstruates, visited the Khamakhya devi temple. It is the same as the system that calls upon the Muslim to namaz five times in a day. The same as the one that calls Christian women to become celibates and dedicate their lives in service as nuns. It is part of my belief system.

And, for any worthwhile "social change", as the SC order supposes to be a harbinger of, to hold water, it should be a cause of celebration for atleast a considerable percentile of the population it proposes to save. As I see it, this ruling neither improves my condition as a woman nor does it address the more burning misogynistic attitudes that sideline my existence. It does not make me feel any more safe or empowered at my own hearth, my workplace or in the society I live in. All it does is sideline, shove, cajole the public eye from what really matters!