Mon 7 Jul 2008
From Rahnuma Ahmed’s op-ed: Another woman said, I was so scared when he said I would have to go to his office, but I was angry too, I knew what was going to happen, I told a friend, I’ll carry a brick in my bag. I want to mark him, so that people know. But the women also spoke of how they themselves felt marked. When I went back to the hostel and told the girls there they wanted to know, what did he do to you? where did he touch you? how long did he hold you? I wept inside, she said. Why didn’t anyone say, where’s that bastard? Let’s go and get him. Such responses make it so difficult to come out. Why should I take on this social pressure?
Protest against campus rape, led by the students union, at Jahangir Nagar University. August 24, 1998. © Abir Abdullah/Drik/Majority World
Roses & Sexual Harrassment
by Rahnuma Ahmed
[New Age, July 7, 2008]
[Cross-posted fromShahidulNews]
`You should not have written about such sensitive issues in such indecorous language,’ faculty members at Jahangirnagar University (JU) told me and my ex-colleague, Manosh Chowdhury. It was 1997, four years before I left JU to become a writer.
We had written about the Provost of a Women’s Hall of Residence. He would target first year women Anthropology students. They handed in a memorandum to the University authorities detailing his abuse of power: he was rude to their family members when they dropped in for visits, he ridiculed what they were taught, and the teachers who taught them (this included us). What was not mentioned in the memorandum however, was that he would often barge into their dormitories. Sometimes, also into the wash rooms. The Provost’s misconduct later made it to the newspapers but what got left out was that he had dubbed three women students ‘lesbians,’ and another, ‘a cigarette smoker.’ We had included these in our article to map out the institutionalised nature of the Provost’s power, to draw attention to the systemic character of sexual harassment on campuses. We had written, The issue is not whether these women are `lesbians’. Women have been scorned on other occassions because they have boyfriends. Women returning to the halls in the evening are taunted, they are told they were `having fun in the bushes.’ Institutional sexual harassment is not about hard facts alone, it takes place through language, through words that ridicule and scorn. (`Oshustho Pradhokkho na ki Pratishthanik Khomota,’ Bhorer Kagoj, 9 July 1997).
We received no printed response, but hate mail instead. And a genteel comment on our `indecorous’ use of language. Our next piece was entitled, ‘What then does one call Sexual Harassment — A Rose?’ (Bhorer Kagoj, 24 August 1997).
The next year witnessed a student movement on Jahangirnagar campus, at forty plus days, the longest anti-rape campaign in South Asia. The University authorities gave in to student pressure, a Fact Finding Committee was formed. As events unfolded it became clear that a group of male students had been involved in successive incidents of rape which had taken place over several months, and that the University authorities had been reluctant to take action because of their political connections to the regime then in power, the Awami League. The movement was strong and unrelenting and gained tremendous popular support. Later, the university authorities meted out token punishment to those very students whom they had earlier protected, rather reluctantly.
One of the demands of the 1998 movement had been the formation of a Policy against Sexual Harassment. Dilara Chowdhury, Mirza Taslima Sultana, Sharmind Neelormi and I had worked long hours for weeks on end, to produce a working draft. I remember, our draft had said, sexual harassment is any unwelcome physical contact and advance, declaration of love accompanied by threat and intimidation if not reciprocated, sexually coloured remarks, display of pornography, any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature…
Policy Against Sexual Harassment: A Torturous Journey
Ten years later.
It’s Friday night, well after ten, Anu Muhammod has just returned from Munshiganj, and I am fortunate to get hold of him. `So Anu, I hear that the Policy has not yet been ratified by the University Syndicate?’ I ask the, professor of economics at Jahangirnagar University, a well-known public intellectual and activist, and a good friend of many years. With a twinkle in his eyes and a deprecating smile, Anu launches into the story.
Naseem Akhter Hossain and I forwarded the Draft Policy to the university administration in 1999. Naseem, as you well know was the Provost of a women’s hall, and one of the most dedicated members of the Fact Finding Committee. The university administration was absolutely terrified of the anti-rape movement. For them it was finally over, some of the students had been punished, they wanted to forget the matter. The next year, 17 of us forwarded it to JU administration, with a signed letter. And in those days, the 8th of March Committee was alive, teachers and students would sit and discuss women’s issues and male power, we would hold a rally on International Women’s Day, left groups, cultural groups would join in. It was an annual ritual, each year we would send the draft to the University administration requesting that they take steps to ratify it, to enforce it, each year they would tell us that it had been misplaced. This went on for several years.
Two years later the BNP led alliance came to power, and the elected Vice-Chancellor was removed from his position. Jahangirnagar University Teachers Association (JUTA) protested against the government action. Anyway, to cut a long story short, JUTA initiated a movement in protest against the government’s high-handedness, a common platform was formed, I was present at one of the Teachers Association meetings and took the opportunity to place the Draft policy. Everyone was charged, and the Draft was approved, so you now had JUTA forwarding it to the University administration for ratification. I inquired again the next year but by then we were back to the old ritual, it had been misplaced. But soon, there was another incident of sexual harassment, a BBA teacher, the accusations were proven to be true, he lost his job. We raised the Policy issue again, each movement helped to revive it. I spoke to Professor Mustahidur Rahman, who was then the Vice-Chancellor.
`Yes Anu, what did he say?’ I am very curious about the reasons forwarded on behalf of institutions, by people in positions of power, the language in which they resist measures aimed at ensuring justice. ‘What did Mustahid bhai say?’
Anu’s smile deepened. ‘He said, yes, of course, we must look into it. But we have so much on our hands. I spoke to other teachers as well, why do we need a special Policy, they said. The country has criminal laws, University rules stipulate that teachers must not violate moral norms, we also have a Proctorial policy. So why do we need a separate Policy against Sexual Harassment? In 2007, another movement began, against a teacher in Bangla department. He also lost his job later, and talk of the Policy was revived again. Actually, the women students went on a fast unto death programme, this was very serious, later Sultana Kamal, Rokeya Kabir, Khushi Kabeer, these women’s movement leaders came and pleaded with the students to break their fast. They did, but on the condition that I would personally take up the matter with the University administration. They said, we trust you, we don’t trust the administration.
After this, the University set up a Committee to review the Policy. I was on that Committee, so was Sultana Kamal. Legal points were added, the draft was brushed up, student organisations were invited to comment on it, also, the Teachers Association. But the teachers are not happy, many think that false allegations will be made, that it will be used by those who have influence, on grounds of personal enmity. I tell them that the Policy has clauses to prevent this from happening, any one who brings false allegations will be severely punished, no law of the land, against murder, kidnapping, theft, whatever has such built-in-clauses. Surely, that will be a deterrent? But it falls on deaf ears. The draft was sent to the Syndicate, it was not ratified. The members felt that it required more consideration.
And now, the latest incident, the one involving a teacher of the Dramatics department. I believe the Fact Finding Committee has submitted its report, there is yet again talk of instituting the Policy, but this time it’s serious. There is new VC now, but this time I think they can no longer avoid it. There is strong support for the Policy.
This is how things stand at present. I think the Policy, once ratified, will create history. It will set a strong precedent for similar policies at other places of work. In garments factories, I often say, for women, it’s not only a question of wages but being able to work in a safe and secure place, free of harassment and sexual advances.
`And what about other public universities,’ I ask, knowing fully well the answer. No, says Anu, there is no talk of a Policy, let alone a finalised Draft.
Jahangirnagar has a strong tradition of protest and resistance, our conversation ends on this note. I forget who said it. Was it Anu? Or, was it me? Maybe, both of us?
Voices of Female Students
Four women students of Drama and Dramatics department have accused the departmental chairperson, M Sanowar Hossain (Ahmed Sani), of harassing them.
One of them confided to her classmates, Sir has asked me to go and see him. Well, why don’t you? I am afraid. Why? Another woman said, he has asked me to go and see him too. You too? I don’t want to. Why not?
They talked and discovered that they were not alone in their experiences of sexual harassment, that it was shared. One of them said, as is the practice in the department, I had bent to touch his feet to seek his blessings, as I rose up he pulled me and kissed me on my forehead. Another woman student, similarly abused but silent until the four junior women stepped forward, spoke of how he had grabbed her and kissed her cheek. Another woman said, I was so scared when he said I would have to go to his office, but I was angry too, I knew what was going to happen, I told a friend, I’ll carry a brick in my bag. I want to mark him, so that people kow.
But the women also spoke of how they themselves felt marked. When I went back to the hostel and told the girls there they wanted to know, what did he do to you? where did he touch you? how long did he hold you? I wept inside, she said. Why didn’t anyone say, where’s that bastard? Let’s go and get him. Such responses make it so difficult to come out. Why should I take on this social pressure?
The girls also said, if it had just happened to me, if I hadn’t discovered that there were other victims, I would never have spoken out. I don’t think anyone would have believed me.
Male Academia and Its Insecurities
Why do University authorities resist the adoption of a policy that will help institute measures to redress wrongs? That will afford women protection against unwanted sexual advances, thereby creating an environment that is in synchrony with what it claims to be, an institution of greater learning and advancement.
I think what lies hidden beneath academic hyperbole is, although the university, as other public and private institutions, appears to be asexual, in reality, it is deeply embedded with sexual categories and preferences. Men are superior, both intellectually and morally, this is assumed to be the incontrovertible truth. For women, to be unmasking and challenging male practices, aided by a Complaint Cell, members of which will listen to their grievances, extend support, advocate sanctions if allegations are proven to be true, is a threat that terrifies the masculine academic regime of power and privileges.
But sexual harassment is not a bunch of roses. It is serious, it needs to be taken seriously.
July 7th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
amar ar kichu bolar nai
In 1998, I had spent a few days at the JU campus ( I do that on and off, I have family there and my mother is alumni). What I had found most disturbing was the non-chalance of some of the teachers and their families to this particular issue. I heard derogotary comments like— Meye guloi to chele der k lai diyeche , did they really need to give their addas in the jhop jhars of dairy gate?..why not reapply the sunset law? arre asholei ki eto rape hoyeche naki, shob exaggerated!
My mother, after hearing the stories had remarked about how simpler things were during her university days and how they had the freedom to roam the jungles of the campus without ever feeling threatened. Her next comment was, ‘ kintu amra meye ra shondhar por baire thaktam na. etoi jokhon insecurity, meye gulo 11 ta porjonto baire thake keno?
Really..what right do we women have to ask for security? For Complaint Cells? Why do we have so many complaints? Where else are we going to need Complaint cells? At bus stations? At Chadni Chawk ? At home? Where else?
I’m ranting again..sorry..but it was a male journalist who had once asked me, Tomader, meyeder eto jhamela thake keno?
July 8th, 2008 at 11:05 am
A Bangladeshi parent always worries more about a daughter than a son. Daughters are more easily sullied in our culture. Far easier to become ‘noshto’ if you are a gal. It isn’t a sexist attitude but a function of biology. Women can give birth, their honour must be above reproach. Unfortunately such attitudes usually lead to chauvinism.
This need to protect a woman’s izzoth in public places also means normal relationships between the sexes can’t develop in the open as much as in the West. This leads to many Bangladeshi guys being perverts. eg. Women wearing skirts and talking to men is a daily occurance over here. I’ve only ever seen one women in Bangladesh, an airline stewardess wear knee length skirt in Dhaka. All the blokes were eying her up, leering at her and a couple were even licking their lips.
July 12th, 2008 at 11:41 am
You don’t even need to be dressed in a short skirt to be leered at by men here, you just have to be a woman. It’s natural, they say, why shouldn’t we look and leer and so on, especially if the woman seems to be “inviting” it with her dress and attitude? And, though it may and probably will be argued that a policy won’t change people’s mindsets and what-not, it’s the first step towards defining sexual harassment and how to respond to it both legally and socially. We need this policy everywhere, in every institution and every organisation. We even need it for the streets - that’s how common and even natural this phenomenon is. We may have lots of policies and policies may not change how we think in a day, but it’ll get people thinking about what they’re about to do if they’re more or less sure of the consequences they may have to face, and it will also be a basis for victims to speak out and protest. Some people may not even know that what they’re doing is objectionable and wrong because it all seems so natural; others don’t care and do it anyway. For some things, leaving it up to people’s conscience is just not enough. They have to be clearly spelled out and hammered into people’s heads . . . really, really hard . . .
July 14th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Jahangirnagar University is very near and dear to my heart. I sort of have an ownership to this one campus and everything their. I was a student there, and became a faculty. But my connection to JU campus had began a long time before I became a student. During my last trip to Bangladesh earlier this year, I spent half a day on campus and felt terrible that I couldn’t meet half of the people I consider my friend. When I saw the article by Rahnuma Ahmed, I so wanted to write! And now here I am.
I want to begin by saying that I’m all for a sexual harassment policy. I think it should be part of any institutional policy without a second thought and come quite naturally. The fact that it is facing so much resistance in JU and in Bangladesh in general is not because the teachers in JU and men in Bangladesh are sexual predators! I left JU and came to the US in January 1998. So I missed the main window of time when the movement against sexual harassment has taken place. My wife, on the other hand, was a student at the time and she was a participant in the movement that Rahnuma Ahmed talks about. I encouraged her to write about her own experience with the movement after seeing the article on UV. Guess she didn’t get to it yet.
What I can tell you is that I know those people. I know every single one of them, for and against this movement. And if you don’t know these people the way I do, you’d never understand why there is this resistance against a sexual harassment policy. No offense to Fariha, but you could never understand the mindset of the families on campus by staying there for a couple of nights.
Let me first talk about the campus environment! It’s a close campus. In those days, Savar was not as booming as it is today. The Savar EPZ was not there or was just starting. The 3000/3500 students and about 1000 faculty/officers/employees and their families used to live in this island. For most students, the only way to spend the afternoon was to visit the Prantik gate for a few hours and then get back to the halls. And there was this other group of students who “fell in love” with their classmate/junior/senior students. Most of the students in JU came from outside Dhaka, from the rural Bangladesh and small towns and for many of them, this was the first experience of coed system. Also this was the first opportunity at freedom without having a parent around. So “falling in love” was sort of “faraz” for some. Anyway, the only way these young couples knew to entertain themselves was to hang out around campus and some did not want to go back to the halls until late in the evening. Without being too graphic, I could say that the level of affection shown in some instances was objectionable, especially if you are out with your young children and teen-agers. Remember that the faculty/employee families are also living on this island, raising their children. Now would you consider letting your 5/6/7/8 year old daughter/son to watch a PG-13/R rated movie? Before you answer that, I would also remind you that most people in Bangladesh are socially conservative, even today. So I understand where Fariha’s relatives are coming from!
Now let’s get to the other side of the story! Why the university Syndicate did not approve the sexual harassment policy drafted? I have not had a chance to look into the details. But I have an educated guess. University syndicate is just like our national parliament. We have some government nominated individuals as syndicate members. But the most vocal part of the syndicate was the elected teacher representatives. And unlike national politics, there was/is not a question of ideological divide. The faculty politics those days was about who gets what. Dr. Mustahidur Rahman was a close friend of Dr. Kazi Saleh Ahmed who was elected VC in 1988 and remained his friend during his first term of tenure. In 1992, the friendship collapsed as Dr. Rahman wanted to run for the office and Dr. Ahmed wanted a second term. In those days, there was no AL/BNP divide in JU faculty politics. So there was a bitterly fought panel election that Dr. Ahmed won and became VC for a second term. But this resulted in a bitter division among the existing faculty and the new recruits. Both Rahnuma and Manash came to the faculty politics around this time. Manashda was a student of JU and Rahnuma was a student of Chittagong University. Both of them, for some interesting faculty politics dynamics, became part of Dr. Rahman’s group. Anyway, that discussion is for another day.
My point is, in this political culture, it’s always difficult to get anything done. Drs. Rahman, Ahmed and their peers are among the first recruits of JU. They have a different kind of ownership to the university. I’m sure, all of them want what they think is the best for the university. Unfortunately, they did not always agree what that “best” was. Compound this with newer recruits with a different attitude toward the university and people with newer, more progressive ideas and demands of different types. When I left JU in 1998, very little was functioning in JU. Each department had their own set of problems and people with different interest. There is no reason to think that every university teacher was honest and had brilliant, modern ideas even though most of them had Ph.D.s completed abroad. You have teachers using students against other teachers for their political gains. These gains can be as little as a post in the hall administration as a house tutor or residential accommodation on campus. You have teachers who lack integrity of character and low moral. And on top of it all, you have student politics divided along the national political line and then some. I think all of it contributed to the failure of the sexual harassment policy. I can bet there are teachers who support it one day because their “group” supports it for a completely different reason; the same teachers oppose it because their group lost interest in it for another unrelated issue. There are very few who supports/opposes it for what it is!
[For those curious souls, the AL/BNP divide in JU faculty politics came when AL came to power in 1996. Dr. Alauddin Ahmed became the VC and after a short stay as the VC, he resigned and became an AL MP.]
July 14th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
#4
* None taken.
* Actually I completely understand where my relatives are coming from too. That was never the issue. I understand that conservative norms are still upheld by mainstream Bangladeshi society. I come from that society, so does my conservative family (plus we’re Sylheti, so a little more conservative than the rest). But that wasn’t the issue that bothered me. What bothered was their response to rape and sexual harassment. Being offended by ostensible displays of affection in the public sphere is one thing (that’s where the social conservatism plays in). General apathy to rape and harassment is another.
I am fully aware of the politics of JU. I still have very close ties to the campus. But I refuse to concede that this is merely an issue of politics. When those entrusted to guard the safety and security of the students of campus, use a policy intended for the protection of students (whose interests they are supposed to oversee) as a means of political gain– that sure reflects a lot on the institution and it’s revered members. I won’t even get into the fact some of the alleged perpetrators are the teachers themselves.
*Is it just politics? Or is it more of a case of apathy/antagonism towards a cause they think they can manipulate to cater to their own needs because it challenges this rotten system that they are represent? It’s not AL vs BNP. It’s merely a politicized system vs one that actually cares about the welfare of its students.
Sure they politicize everything…but when they try to do it to a cause that concerns the safety of not just the female students on campus but also the wards of the teachers (most of whom inevitably end up as students of the same uni), it really reflects more than just political greed/rivalry. It shows that they just don’t think the issue is important enough. They don’t realize how much it affects their own lives.
But you’re right in one respect. I still don’t understand the resistance to the policy. I don’t understand the logic of the people who are opposing it. A few days ago, I mentioned this article to my cousin, a student of JU, a ward of a JU teacher, a resident of the campus. I asked her about the incident in the Dramatics department (she’s from a different department). Her answer was, “See, I don’t see what the big deal is. These girls weren’t raped. Apparently, the whole kissing on the cheek and forehead by the gurujon is a departmental tradition there. And these girls are seen to be openly intimate with their male counterparts everywhere else. So what are they complaining about?” I was later told that the teacher was blackmailing his students with exam marks and had openly declared that their testimonies against him would loose them the marks– Amar haat e ekhono 250 marks ache. Eta kintu bhule jeo na My cousin also said, ‘I guess they just didn’t like him’.
So is it just politics? Or conservative mindset? Or plain old ‘Oh I don’t think sexual harassment is ever gonna be my problem’?
July 15th, 2008 at 2:45 am
A former student of JU writes about his memories of the anti-rapist andolon of 1998. In my book, that is the single most disgraceful episode of Awami League’s rule. When we learnt that the honour of an ordinary girl is cheaper than the honour of a rich man’s girl in Bangladesh. Also when we found out the true nature of our intellectual classes, how craven and amoral and politicized they all really are.
Anyway, here are Shumon’s memories - one and two. He mentions the incident of Manik breaking Rahnuma’s camera.
July 15th, 2008 at 2:56 am
Sensible,
Let’s be clear here. A JU BCL leader forcibly raped more than 100 girls on campus. Often at gunpoint. He then celebrated his century with a party on campus - full of mishti and booze.
All the authorities did, after plentiful hemming, hawing, dillying and dallying was a slap on the wrist. A mere suspension. When in any civilized country of the world, he would have been jailed or hanged. Instead, the govt of the day let him go abroad. That was the AL government.
As you will find out from the comments section of the Sachal posts, leading so-called intellectuals of the day (Shamsur Rahman, Asaduzzaman Noor, Santosh Gupta, Waheedul Huq) defended the crimes, tried to rationalize them away, tried to talk the protesters down. Waheedul Huq, whom some people worship like he’s the second coming of Christ, even wrote in the papers decrying the protests. Any pretension to moral leadership (jati’r bibek type bullshit) falls apart when you read such things.
The least we can do is be unequivocal in condemnation. I’m sure you know that for years afterwards (and who knows maybe even now), female JU students had a deep stigma attached to them. Wedding proposals would fall apart at the mere mention of their alma mater.
And still it goes on. Still we defend and make excuses. Our veneer of civilization isn’t even skin-deep, cos there’s no veneer at all.
July 15th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
[...] Roses & Sexual Harrassment [...]
July 15th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
# 4
I would have been happier if sensible had gotten his facts right.
First, I studied in Dhaka University, not CU. Second, the late eighties were turbulent times, and I, alongwith many other people, including both individuals and organisations, was out in the streets protesting against President Ershad’s dictatorial rule. JUTA had joined in the protests. In the 1988 JUTA elections, Kazi Saleh Ahmed became the President, Khondokar Mustahidur Rahman, the General Secretary, and I the Assistant General Secretary (for the second year). It was during this time that the appointment of a new JU VC was in the offing. Professor Kazi Saleh Ahmed was one among the panel of three nominated by the JU Senate; the final selection was to be made by the Chancellor, the-then President Ershad. It was at this time, that a sudden emergency meeting of the Executive Committee of JUTA was called. The President, it turned, out had invited JUTA EC members for a cup of tea. We were to go and meet him that very evening. Long discussions followed, I disagreed, my point was that my electoral mandate did not permit me to meet the President without the consent of the teaching community, given that we as a body were part of the anti-Ershad movement.
The rest of the Committee went and met with the President. I didn’t; instead, I handed in a note of dissent (needless to add, those who went, more particularly, the leaders were upset with me; my actions did not go unpunished but since this does not have any direct bearing on the anti-rape/sexual harassment issue, I will not go into details). A few days later, Kazi Saleh Ahmed was appointed JU Vice Chancellor.
I left for higher studies in January 1989. I returned in 1994 to a campus where teacher’s politics was being re-configured around political party lines. I did not join any group; whenever elections came up, I voted for candidates on their individual merit rather than party affiliation. This continued till the day I left teaching in 2001. After my return in 1994, I did not stand for any elected post either.
July 16th, 2008 at 5:50 am
can anyone repost the sachal links as mentioned in #7? i’d like to read but nothing loads and i keep getting error messages. also i the ‘defending’ of rapists by intellectuals i want to read. i was very young then, when ju rapes happpend and have only heard of this incident. and would like to know more. any other resource would also be very grateful. thanks you.
July 17th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
It has been a norm for the history of the human kind that the strong takes advantage of the weak. Men take advantage of the women, rich people take advantage of the poor, intelligent people take advantage of the ignorant, it goes on and on and on. Whereas it should be opposite. That would be a perfect, But unfortunately we never lived in the perfect world. The situation will perpetuated in a place like Bangladesh where there is no justice and victims are blamed not the perpetrators. Only way to solve this to speak out, not to be ashamed to demand justice when wrong has been done.