Indira Nooyi’s interview a few weeks back drew a lot of attention from social and media hawks. Not surprisingly though. When one of the world’s most powerful businesswomen speaks, it usually makes for a meaty news. And when the conversation travels beyond her office to her kitchen, it can be fairly juicy as well.
Seemingly an innocuous avowal, her statement ‘women can’t have it’ all whipped up frenzy of sorts, with ‘Social Eagles’ , tearing her apart for their piece of flesh. Too much for mere selection of wrong words!
Chauvinists smugly took delight in the ‘validation’ of their anachronistic beliefs and the over-zealous flag bearers of Feminine rights were astonished by the ‘blasphemy’ committed by their most priced ambassador. Whilst the former have never made any bones about their views on the fairer sex and are usually given short shrift, it’s the latter that ended up, unbeknown to them, revealing the frailty of their conviction.
Something that should have been passed off as a common agony of any busy senior executive of a global organization, triggered a panic, prompting defense like a culprit desperately fending off an allegation.
After all, men can’t have it all too. Max Schireson, CEO of a leading Database company quit a high paying job as it required him to travel more than 300,000 thousand miles this year, leaving very little time for his family.
This is not the first instance of over reaction from the self-appointed emissaries of Eve. The recent Airtel ad has become their latest smashing board slamming it as outrightly ‘regressive’.
Here's how the ad rolls (An excerpt from NDTV.com)
A perfectly turned out super-boss asks her team to get a job done the same day. She indicates that "can't be done" is not an option. The boss leaves while her subordinate is hard at work. Alone in the office, he gets a call from his wife who is whipping up dinner for him. She suggests he abandon work and come home to a great meal. For good measure she video calls him.
Peeved by the wife’s dinner making act, gang of hyper feminists have snubbed the script for stereotyping women. This allergy to kitchen smacks of fanaticism defining emancipation in very narrow terms. It also insinuates against the working women who have taken to the dual role by choice. What this holds for a housewife is anyone’s guess.
This version of equality also has strong undertones of hatred for males resulting in competition and comparisons. Therefore, any depiction of women that deviates from their tunnel vision, seeking to mirror the male archetypes is slammed as an act of discrimination. Blinded by obsession, they fail to foresee that benchmarking men runs the risk of stripping women of their individuality, the very essence of empowerment. Feminists must understand that it is not a zero sum game where the rights for women can only come at the cost of men. It is rather a function of mutually accepted arrangement enabling uncontested co-existence of both with their own set of successes and struggles owing to the choices they make. I know enough working women who would rather prefer sweating for domestic errands than toiling in air-conditioned offices. And there are enough men out there who are being equal partners with their working spouse in household chores. It’s all about the freedom to make the choices and not the choices made.
Am I claiming it to be an ideal world? No. But are we getting there? Yes. Until then, the feminist brigade would do good to choose their battles to fight, lest the world starts giving them short shrift as well.
Seemingly an innocuous avowal, her statement ‘women can’t have it’ all whipped up frenzy of sorts, with ‘Social Eagles’ , tearing her apart for their piece of flesh. Too much for mere selection of wrong words!
Chauvinists smugly took delight in the ‘validation’ of their anachronistic beliefs and the over-zealous flag bearers of Feminine rights were astonished by the ‘blasphemy’ committed by their most priced ambassador. Whilst the former have never made any bones about their views on the fairer sex and are usually given short shrift, it’s the latter that ended up, unbeknown to them, revealing the frailty of their conviction.
Something that should have been passed off as a common agony of any busy senior executive of a global organization, triggered a panic, prompting defense like a culprit desperately fending off an allegation.
After all, men can’t have it all too. Max Schireson, CEO of a leading Database company quit a high paying job as it required him to travel more than 300,000 thousand miles this year, leaving very little time for his family.
This is not the first instance of over reaction from the self-appointed emissaries of Eve. The recent Airtel ad has become their latest smashing board slamming it as outrightly ‘regressive’.
Here's how the ad rolls (An excerpt from NDTV.com)
A perfectly turned out super-boss asks her team to get a job done the same day. She indicates that "can't be done" is not an option. The boss leaves while her subordinate is hard at work. Alone in the office, he gets a call from his wife who is whipping up dinner for him. She suggests he abandon work and come home to a great meal. For good measure she video calls him.
Peeved by the wife’s dinner making act, gang of hyper feminists have snubbed the script for stereotyping women. This allergy to kitchen smacks of fanaticism defining emancipation in very narrow terms. It also insinuates against the working women who have taken to the dual role by choice. What this holds for a housewife is anyone’s guess.
This version of equality also has strong undertones of hatred for males resulting in competition and comparisons. Therefore, any depiction of women that deviates from their tunnel vision, seeking to mirror the male archetypes is slammed as an act of discrimination. Blinded by obsession, they fail to foresee that benchmarking men runs the risk of stripping women of their individuality, the very essence of empowerment. Feminists must understand that it is not a zero sum game where the rights for women can only come at the cost of men. It is rather a function of mutually accepted arrangement enabling uncontested co-existence of both with their own set of successes and struggles owing to the choices they make. I know enough working women who would rather prefer sweating for domestic errands than toiling in air-conditioned offices. And there are enough men out there who are being equal partners with their working spouse in household chores. It’s all about the freedom to make the choices and not the choices made.
Am I claiming it to be an ideal world? No. But are we getting there? Yes. Until then, the feminist brigade would do good to choose their battles to fight, lest the world starts giving them short shrift as well.
