E-Kantipur

This year’s International theme for Women’s Day, ‘Equal Rights, Equal opportunities: Progress for all’, aimed at equal treatment and opportunities for both genders. Various programmes, such as workshops, cycle rallies, women’s processions, theatrical performances, and talk programmes were organised in the Capital. Ironically, while the Capital was celebrating International Women’s Day with the innumerable programmes, the front page of Kantipur newspaper displayed women labourers working at a brick factory. These women workers had no knowledge of ‘Women’s Day’ and the celebrations that were going on. They are just one example; there are many more women still unaware of the hullabaloo over Women’s Day. 

After all, 100 years of significant attitudinal changes and ‘all the battles that have been fought for women’ worldwide have not changed many women’s lives in Nepal. Where did we go wrong? A public holiday was declared on the day, but sadly, for many women daily-wage workers, a day-off meant a day without any wages and therefore, without any food. Nevertheless, urban areas, to some extent, have witnessed a significant change in attitudinal shift in women’s and society’s thoughts about women’s emancipation. 

Like in previous years, various women’s programmes, supported by various organisations, commemorated the day. Some were widely advertised in newspapers, such as that of a talk by Dr. Kiran Bedi, a retired Indian Police Service (IPS) officer from India, at the Annapurna Hotel. Though I didn’t want to miss the opportunity to hear her, I gave the event a miss, as after much thought, I decided to enjoy the day by boycotting the event as a resistance to the logic of consumer capitalism. 

In very general terms, consumer capitalism is an economic and cultural condition in which consumer’s demands are manipulated on a very large scale by marketing techniques to the advantage of the seller. Such marketing strategies do not appear to have direct coercive effects; rather, attractive marketing strategies and massive flow of advertisements influence consumers. As a result, the ‘need’ of a consumer is replaced by ‘never-ending desires’. Such manipulative market strategies fan the fire of unending desires for commercial commodities.

Two reasons made me boycott the event, even though I admire Dr. Bedi for being the woman that she is. Firstly, the idea of Rs. 2,000 as an entrance fee, to me, was ridiculous. I thought that as a woman, I should not be paying to attend a programme marking the ‘100th International Women’s Day’. In any other circumstance, I would have attended the talk without giving much thought to the fee. As it was organised for women by women, the event should have been free for all women without any discrimination. Secondly, the massive advertisements, the selection of a five-star hotel as a venue, and the high-priced ticket (even though the money will be used for women’s causes) seemed like a perfect example of consumer capitalism. Here, the talk by a woman was turned into a commodity, which buyers (other women) were “hailed” as consumers of.

Modern capitalism is not only governed by production but also by consumption. As a result, modern capitalism manipulates consumers psychologically, and persuades them to purchase the product without a consumer’s knowledge of the split between their ‘needs’ and ‘desires’. Did the people who attended the talk need the motivation? Maybe not! Most probably, many of them were already economically and socially empowered. 

As a matter of fact, in our country, a large number of women are socially and economically outside the hegemonic power structure. The very conceptual framework of the International Women’s Day slogan—that claimed to adopt inclusiveness and equality as its mantra—subverted the essence of that slogan. The women who would have really benefited from Dr. Bedi’s talk could not get access inside that elite space. They needed the talk more than I ever did. Realising the cause, the slogan, and the event, I not only repressed my desires but also resisted my proxy identity of a consumer.

The event seemed to me like being meaningful but being diverted into a desire for elite gathering and commercialisation. Since the talk was to commemorate Women’s Day, I wish it had been organised at some public space where class boundaries would not have prohibited any woman from attending the event. Thus, it would have been open to all without any discrimination and would have included all as equals. Paradoxically, wealth, education, culture, and social network became restraining criterion of exclusion, even if indirectly. At the moment, I am not aware if the entrance fund will be used for the betterment of underprivileged women. Despite that, I still believe Dr. Bedi’s talk would have been much more appreciated in a larger mass.  

I have always admired the strong and fearless public personality of Dr. Kiran Bedi, who became the first woman to join the IPS in 1972. She is an appropriate woman to deliver an inspirational talk on Women’s Day. However, the choice of the venue and the highly-priced entrance excluded underprivileged women. By doing so, it presented a subtle mode of capital power in the guise of female empowerment. Nevertheless, as far as a talk by Dr. Bedi goes, I still look forward to hear her some other time and in some other place.

archanathapa00@hotmail.com

Post Your Comment

Please note that all the fields marked * are mandatory.
* Full Name
* Address
* Email Address
* Comment
* Captcha	Get another CAPTCHA code
Note:	Comments containing abusive words or slander shall not be published.