Shades of Gray

The prestigious Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) has been in news regularly since it was stripped of its minority status by the courts. The HRD minister and The National Monitoring Committee for Minorities’ Education (NMCME) called it unfortunate by arguing that it is an institute that set up to educate the Muslim community. However, the recent episode where a postgraduate student of the AMU was harassed for wearing T-shirts and jeans in her campus, casts serious doubts over its work in enlightening Muslim minds.

Farah Aziz Khanum, a 23-year-old journalism student of AMU, was threatened to change her dress habits by replacing T-shirt with kurta and dupatta and stop her campaign for an effective mechanism in the university to address complaints of sexual harassment. “You are the only one who is defying the dress code of the university’’ she was told by the moral police. Though the university doesn’t have an official dress code, she was told to wear a dupatta. When she continued with her T-shirt, a group of students began to comment upon and abuse her. On February 2, while she walking inside the campus, two youth on a bike snatched her shawl and sped away. When she approached the Students Union for help, she was told, “If you want to become Bhanwari Devi, go on with your campaign.” Bhanwari Devi, who hit the headlines in 1992, is the Dalit gangrape victim from Rajasthan who dared to report a child marriage. This statement should be interpreted as a veiled threat to the young girl and speaks a lot of the mentality of the Muslim students studying at AMU. Is this the enlightenment NMCME wants to bring about? Aren’t these students corrupting the “prestigious” tag that is associated with this University?

Farah also alleged that AMU authorities had dragged their feet when it came to punishing the culprits. She added that a section of the AMU students’ union threatened her with dire consequences if she pressed on with her attempt to overhaul the functioning of the women’s cell. This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that the thinking of AMU authorities is no different from that of the erring students. AMU’s moral police have found fault not only about Farah’s dress, but also her practice of sharing meals with boys at canteens and even visiting the library with them. She had been threatened in the past by a section of the students—which enjoys a substantial following. ‘‘Girls are not expected to be seen in public places,’’ she has been repeatedly told.

The issue here is for the backward mentality that exists in a community that forms a significant portion of our population. When tennis ace Sania Mirza won matches and praise, a section of mullahs and clerics were busy finding faults with her attire which they thought was against Islam. This thinking worries me. Recently, there has been a lot of talk about giving minorities reservations in the private sector. Imagine the plight of a woman whose supervisor has such mentality!

While moral policing exists even among the Hindus and though it too cannot be justified, at least no one bothers about T-shirts and Jeans. Unless until Muslims themselves adopt a liberal outlook, neither will their ‘backward’ image change in a globalised world nor will they attain the equal footing our HRD minister wants to give them through reservations and minority statuses.

Inzy is mad at Team India. The reason is that they appealed against him for obstructing the field. Inzamam was given out after he fended off Suresh Raina’s throw from mid-off with the bat while still out of his crease. The umpires upheld the Indians’ appeal for obstructing the field. This was just the third instance in one-day cricket of a batsman being given out in this fashion, the other two being Rameez Raja and Mohinder Amarnath.

“I would not have imagined that Rahul Dravid and his team would do such a thing. I am not bothered about my dismissal but an appeal made in an unsportsmanlike manner by the visiting team can have an adverse affect on the relations between the two opponents”, Inzy wrote in his column in The News. Inzaman’s remarks immediately found support from former Pakistani wicket-keeper Moin Khan.

While it is true that the Indo-Pak series has been termed as the “dosti” series, this “dosti” is not to be carried on to the cricket field where you should play and behave as professionals. To expect that Indians won’t do anything to counter Pakistanis while the latter break every rule in the book, is to look to exploit this friendship. And look who is talking about the spirit of the game. Where was Inzy when Sami and Shoaib Akhtar vented out their frustation at Dravid and Sehwag in the first test after being unable to take an Indian wicket for 410 runs. This sledging incident was termed justifiable ‘aggression’ which adds to the flavour of the contest. If you kill, it is sacrifice and if I kill, it is murder !!!. Inzamam also seems to have forgotten the Asian Test Championship in 1999 in Kolkata, when Pakistan appealed and got Sachin Tendulkar run out after his path was blocked by Shoaib Akhtar. Similarly,in the 1999 Chennai Test, Moin Khan had successfully appealed for a catch by himself after Sourav Ganguly’s drive off Saqlain Mushtaq hit the silly point fielder’s leg, bounced on the pitch before ricocheting in to the wicketkeeper’s gloves. Both Inzamam-ul Haq and Moin Khan seem to be suffering from an acute case of memory loss.

The big man from Multan should learn the rules of the games instead of crying foul after breaking rules. And if Pakistan is so keen to build bridges of friendship even in the middle of a cricket field, how about losing the one-day series for starters?