CHENNAI: Speaking to the press after a seminar on women’s empowerment in Chennai late last month, the Chairperson of the Tamil Nadu State Commission for Women, Ms AS Kumari, shared the message that women and girls should avoid using photographs of themselves as their display pictures on social media. She is reported to have said: “I tell this to students often: do not keep your image as your DP as cybercriminals are morphing it. Falling in love is an individual prerogative, but they need to choose the right person.”
The two remarks seem disparate, but it is understandable how they are connected: the lack of general maturity or permissibility in Indian society about romantic love is linked to the threat of personal ruin in the eyes of that society. I am inclined to believe that Ms Kumari’s intentions weren’t harmful — but also that there is a large gap here between the need for expedient interventions and long-term, meaningful societal changes.
As far as stopgaps go, Ms. Kumari is not wrong to suggest being careful with one’s photographs as a protection mechanism. But these remarks need to be properly contextualised. What are the real implications for a woman or girl whose photographs are stolen? Those will mostly happen within her own family, school or college, workplace or other known circles.
For some, the circles may be larger — can a performing artist, an influencer or anyone in public-facing work be secretive about their images beyond a point? Of course not. Still, even for the average person, the effects will be ostracization, loss of matrimonial or job prospects, gossip and so on — as well as the threat of domestic abuse.
To tell someone who may be more vulnerable to these effects than others to post images of plants, pets or motivational messages instead may be fine as an immediate measure, but it does absolutely nothing to change the larger biases and prejudices that would require her to do so at all.
Tamil Nadu is often lauded for being safer for women than states in the north of the country. What is meant is usually that “the streets” are perceived as safer, that there is less reported risk of physical violence or harassment from strangers. But households are not safer.
Practices and worldviews are not progressive. If they were, the stigma of cybercrime would be squarely on cybercriminals, the stigma of violence on perpetrators, the stigma of discrimination on the bigoted. Why are all such instances under-reported? It is because the systems of redressal carry the same harsh judgments of society at large. Which is to say: if someone tries to lodge a cybercrime report and is told “Why did you put your own photograph up, even after what Ms AS Kumari said?” then that practical stopgap too becomes a tool of oppression.
There is a vast difference between safety and protection. A safe woman experiences independence; a protected woman only experiences defence within certain parameters. All our conversations about gender in Tamil Nadu and beyond would do well to remain cognisant of this difference, and what it is we really seek to achieve when we speak of empowerment.