Women’s Right To Freedom Of Expression - The Khushboo Question

Right to freedom of expression is a constitutional right guaranteed to every citizen of India. However, it is doubtful if this is understood in its full capacity by all sections of our society. Also, if gender plays a role when it comes to the luxury of exercising this right is worth looking into. Tamil superstar Khushboo underwent quite some trouble in 2005 when she decided to exercise her right to freedom of expression on a very sensitive topic – premarital sex. A deeper dive into this chapter will possibly unravel many double standards of the Indian civil society and media.

In October 2005, the respected news magazine India Today published a survey in which a lot of college students confessed to having premarital sex. For its Tamil language edition, India Today asked Khushboo about her reaction to the survey. Khushboo, who lived together with her future husband for two years before marrying him, opined that “pre-marital sex is okay provided safety measures are followed to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.” She also said that “no educated man would expect his wife to be a virgin at the time of wedding.”

One would think that the comments were innocuous enough, particularly when juxtaposed against the survey which would have shattered the comfortable myths Indians grow up with. One would further think that the advice about safe sex is relevant in the context that India has one of the fastest- growing HIV patient populations in the world, with Tamil Nadu leading the way. In fact, the first AIDS patient in India was identified in Tamil Nadu.

The initial reactions to Khushboo’s remarks did not give a clue about what was to follow. Sun TV carried a report on her remarks and the news of a small demonstration against her for having maligned Tamil women. The demonstration apparently also demanded an unconditional apology to all Tamil women.

But soon, the protests snowballed into something wholly different. Her remarks unleashed a veritable storm, with the Dalit Panthers of India (DPI) and the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) orchestrating a campaign against her, which comprised filing false cases in courts throughout Tamil Nadu, burning her effigies, and a demand that she should leave the state and return to Maharashtra. Some of them went on to allege that Khushboo made the remarks on pre-marital sex to justify her own life's experiences and that she had no right to talk of the chastity of Tamil women. Moral policing moulded itself in various forms and came out as statements like ‘it is not correct to advocate free sex,’ ‘marriages are based purely on trust,’ ‘it is important to protect the institution of marriage,’ and the like. Media – both national and local- was crammed with Khushboo and her remarks.

It is interesting that the cases filed against Khushboo were all under criminal law. In the US, a private citizen can only file a civil case against an individual. He could prefer a criminal complaint against another person, but the district attorney’s office will have to decide if there is a prima facie case and launch criminal proceedings. Here, every Tom, Dick and Harry was filing criminal complaints. A total of twenty eight complaints were filed in various district courts nearly simultaneously. Judges, who have no hesitation in postponing even murder cases against politically-connected persons, responded with unusual alacrity, issuing summons. At least in a few instances, these summons conflicted with each other, requiring Khushboo’s appearance hundreds of miles away on the same day.

Khushboo tearfully apologized on Television for having hurt the sentiments of her people. Though the demand for apology was met with this, the lawsuits proceeded.

The politics involved in the whole issue cannot be missed. The actress had earlier demanded an apology from a film director Thankar Bachchan, for his remark that “actresses who act for money are like prostitutes.” Many conventional political parties (friends of the director as well) could not tolerate the audacity of a woman to make such ‘noise.’ Groups which waited for a chance to even out scores used this situation heavily.

A few enlightened citizens like Suhasini (film actor) came to Khushboo’s rescue raising the legitimate issue of freedom of expression. Not so surprisingly, she also faced vehement criticism for ‘bringing shame to Tamil people.’ Fortunately, there were some others also who argued that they will defend Khushboo’s right to speak her mind even though they did not agree with her opinion. The leader of the Dalit Panthers found himself isolated when he appeared on NDTV and claimed that the protesters did not act at his or his party’s instigation.

However, protests virtually held Khushboo hostage for a month at her home in Chennai. The groups that politicized the issue went on organizing protests and throwing footwear and eggs even when she tried to appear before the Magistrate. To add to the confusion, at least four criminal complaints were filed against India Today for publishing the sex survey and the starlet’s remarks.

Here, we see a clear case of intimidation and trying to deny freedom of speech which is guaranteed by our constitution. It is worth noting that political groups protest only when women threaten what they imagine to be sexual decorum. If it were a man who had said this, the media would have had a field day covering major sections of the society and asking every other person his opinion about Indian women and their rights over their bodies! A woman making a comment on a subject is far more than a taboo.

A pertinent question here is what the masses (especially women) would do if they have to give a vent to their views. In light of Khushboo’s experience, the safest option would probably be to crib about it in the safety of one’s living room, have a happy dinner, and sleep!

Indian civil society should understand that women of this century are more matured and sure about themselves, their sexuality than their counterparts from 1990s. It is high time that the Indian man stood up and tried to accept the fact that women and sexuality have come of age and pre-marital sex might be a reality, more than they think of it as a westernized concept.

As a nation, we should stop being cowards. We should condemn our famous mentality to hide away from things that we feel are against the ‘traditional picture.’ Why the double standards? Many television serials show men having a wife and multiple mistresses. Why don't protestors target such themes? There is never protest against such themes because the one indulging in free sex is a man. Nobody agitates against the filthy language, the sexual innuendos and double meaning in the lyrics used in movies. Khushboo was the chosen one, undoubtedly because she was a soft target.

Politicians and the beholders of the destiny of the nation think that 33% reservation for women in the Parliament is enough to make the fairer sex feel safe. But don’t they forget that the constitution has given the power of free speech to all the citizens of the nation. This right should endow men and women alike the courage to say that, “hey, I don’t think I agree to being nudged when I am walking on the roads” or talk freely about their views on pre-marital sex, religion, contraceptives and much more. The day has to come when freedom of speech is not just a clause in the constitution.

It is regrettable that media all over India chose to sensationalise the Khushboo issue rather than point out the politically motivated tactics of the self-styled champions of Tamil culture. Some media took it out of context and irresponsibly ran stories that were provocative and untrue. The very first report that instigated the whole issue came up on Sun TV expressing ‘shock’ over Khushboo’s remarks. It was a well strategised blow to undermine her popularity through a gameshow ‘Jackpot’ that airs on Jaya TV, archrival of Sun TV. Such cheap and irresponsible actions by some sections of the media who defend their actions as ‘lost in translation!’ cannot be forgiven. There should be a minimum level of ethics in media etiquette.

If a debate is not generated to discuss such issues, we stand a high risk of disintegrating our democracy in the coming years. A country where fifty percent of the population does not have a voice in the mainstream media or public domain as a whole, cannot hope to achieve anything substantial.

The Khushboo story came to a close only when The Supreme Court suspended trial in as many as 23 criminal cases against her. A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice M.K. Sharma stayed the trial and issued notices against pro-Tamil outfits for outraging public morality against her.

It is depressing that one has to move the High Court or the Supreme Court to obtain justice. One can be subjected to harassment through criminal complaints that can only be fought through expenditure of considerable amounts of money and time. What we need immediately is a reform of the criminal law so that free speech – for men and women - is not subject to prosecution even by the state let alone by individuals.

Coupled with that, we also need to inculcate a strong sense of responsibility and accountability in our media to ensure that they facilitate democratic processes and not impede them. Ethics should not be limited to speeches; let us put some into practice as well.