When will this highest and hardest glass ceiling shatter?

I have been meaning to write this for about two weeks now; basically ever since Donald Trump got elected to be the next President of the United States. Even after all these days, it is yet to sink in. I could never in my wildest dreams have imagined that the Americans would actually select a misogynist, racist, hate - monger as their President. And what is more bemusing is that they selected him over a strong, confident and independent woman. Is gender bias really that strong in the world? People, even women, went ahead and voted for a totally inexperienced man who is a known sexist with the appalling view about women as apparent as when he said on camera that they ought to "grab them by the p***y"; over an established lawyer, senator and basically absolutely qualified for the role woman. Wow! It totally baffles me. It does.

I am not an American Citizen and I do not even live there. In fact, I haven't set foot in the US ever and I am totally uninterested in their Politics. I have not read much about either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton and though I have not heard many nice things about Clinton, I had definitely read and heard what Donald Trump would keep throwing at the people through his statements and tweets. They were far more disturbing than humorous. Inciting people based on race and religion; demeaning your opponent based on her gender; advocating sexual assault as a sign of one's masculinity and 'stardom'; and then dismissing it as "locker-room talks" - these are definitely not qualities one would like in a man holding the most powerful position in the world.

Most of our politicians in India are not exactly role models either, but here is one guy who is openly and brazenly chauvinist / supremacist and proud of it. And despite that more than half of about 325 million people put their own and their country-people's as well as the whole world's future in his hands.

Hillary Clinton had her flaws but she still had more leadership qualities than her opponent. She had the grace and confidence and even presence of mind to lead the US and indirectly impact the whole world. But then in one of the most developed country in the world, being a woman is more of a drawback than being inexperienced, brash, sexist and racist. True! It is the highest and hardest glass ceiling and it has not yet been shattered.

Now, I can only soothe my hurt feelings by appreciating and adhering to the words Clinton spoke in her concession speech, "never stop believing that fighting for what's right is worth it." Having said that, it was never really important to actually have a woman as a President. That would have only been symbolic in establishing and proving the fact that a woman can be anything a man can be. In our own country, and much before the US, we had one of our most effective Prime Minister who happened to be a woman. Despite my ideological difference with the Indian National Congress Party and my utter dislike for the Gandhi dynasty, I would not deny that Indira Gandhi was one of our most respected and able Prime Ministers. But like I said, it is only symbolic because despite having shattered the glass ceiling in India long back, it's not like our society is very accommodating for women here. It's not.

The purpose is not just to appoint a woman to the highest office. The purpose is to identify and prove by example that in our country, and our world, there is place for all genders and all races and all religions and that none is superior to the other. It's all about your capability and not where you come from. It's about what you are made of and not who you are. That is exactly what we want people to learn, and remember. You need to prove your worth irrespective of your gender. So, again to quote Clinton, I would like to highlight that "all the little girls... never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world to pursue and achieve your own dreams."

Maybe it is time we start appreciating the likes of Justin Trudeau with his forward thinking and equalist and humanist agenda. Take a bow, people of Canada - you did far better than the Americans.

Seven things we can learn from children

Today is Children's Day in India. I have been seeing everyone sharing happy messages of their childhood since morning and it makes me wonder how come we lost all that charm all too soon. I think back and wonder how our childhood was all about innocence and playfulness; about joy and freedom. And yet it all eludes us now as grown ups. So, I grabbed a pen and paper and quickly jotted down what I would like to bring back from my childhood.

I made a list - a list of seven things we adults can learn from children. Here we go:

1. Be happy without reason

Children do not really need any reason to be happy. Just a smile can trigger off a laughathon. Just a touch of the finger-tip can set in a rally of tickling game. A funny scene in a movie can lead to raptures that continue well after the movie is over. A witty comment, a joke is enough to brighten the atmosphere. They don't plan their happiness. They don't think, "I'll be happy when this happens." They just are happy.

2. Forgive and forget

The kids don't keep grudges. They fight, they make-up, and they move on. No kid will remind you weeks later that you fought with me that day and this is what you had said. They won't tell you, "Oh! You hurt me when you did this." They simply get over it. And that is the reason they sleep peacefully.

3. Get over guilt

They make mistakes - as all humans do. They feel sorry too - as all humans do. But just as they don't linger on grudges, they don't linger on guilt either. They move on. They apologise and when the apology is accepted, they forget all about the incident itself. And guess what, they sometimes make the same mistakes again. But at least by harbouring no guilt, they keep the innocence alive.

4. Live in the moment

The children don't dwell in the past. They don't worry about their future. All they are concerned with is their present. They feel the feeling they are having that moment - be it joy, or sorrow, or anxiety, whatever. They just go with the flow! They just have a buoyant free spirit that is not bound by the shackles of past failures and future uncertainties. 

5. Wonder

I have quoted this earlier on numerous occasions and I will quote this again: There are no seven wonders in the eyes of a child; there are seven million. They find something exciting and beautiful in everything they see. The gorging fat caterpillar in the garden gets them all excited. Sitting in a train is an experience to cherish. A yard full of dandelions may seem like weeds to an adult; but to a child, it is a field of beautiful yellow flowers through which he/she can make thousand wishes. A paper boat on water is as wondrous as the huge ship in the sea.

6. Believe in magic

When was the last time you believed that Santa would grant your wish? When was the last time you believed that a four leaved clover will bring you good luck? When we were kids, we would see a pair of sparrows and earnestly believed that we await 'joy' that day. And then we would single out all happy instances during an otherwise normal day and attribute it to the two birds. Simply because we believed in the power of those birds. We believed in fairies and we believed in angels. We believed in magic and we believed in prayer. And all in all, these beliefs made our lives beautiful.

7. Fool around sometimes

Children have the most amazing ability to be carefree and merry. They allow themselves the freedom to appear like a fool. They can jump on the bed or splash into a puddle or even strip down to nothing and run through the neighbourhood without a care in the world. They don't try to be so darn perfect all of the time. And they don't worry about what the onlookers will think or say. Any other person's opinion does not matter as long as they are having fun.

I think sometimes we adults need to revisit our childhood and 'reboot our systems to these default settings' to enjoy life. How about doing it today? How about doing it every year on Children's Day? Let's bring back our inner children out every year this day and enjoy life once again.

Image source: Google image search

Is going to war with Pakistan the solution to infiltration?

Gurdaspur, Pathankot, and now Uri: Yet another Indian Army Base was ambushed again. And yet again, for over two days since the heavily armed militants stormed a battalion headquarters of the Indian Army in north Kashmir's Uri, killing at least 17 soldiers and injuring 10 other personnel, all Indians including some attention seeking politicians are baying for Pakistan's blood.

The Hindustan Times highlights that the incident was the single deadliest attack on the Indian Army in at least 26 years. As expected, given the proximity of the attack to the Line of Control (LoC), the line demarcating India-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, and the sophistication of the fidayeen (suicide squad) attackers, Indian leaders were swift in blaming Pakistan. Basis a primary research, the Indian authorities believe that Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), the same group responsible for the strike earlier this year on the Pathankot Air Force base in Punjab, carried out the Uri strike. The Pathankot attack, along with the July 2015 attack on a police station in Gurdaspur in Punjab, highlights a growing frequency of high-profile fidayeen attacks against hard targets. All three attacks have come in relatively quick succession after a relative lull in alleged Pakistan-sponsored attacks in India after the 2008 Mumbai attack, which, by contrast, involved a large-scale coordinated strike against softer civilian targets. It is also believed that the time and place of the Uri attack is of special significance since the Indian Army is already facing criticism for its heavy-handed tactics in suppressing protesters in Kashmir following the killing of Burhan Wani, a Hizbul Mujahideen militant, earlier this summer. It is said that this attack is timed by Pakistan to move the international focus to the Kashmir-issue.

But, all this is for political analysts to probe. What I am appalled by is the fact that the entire nation is screaming for a war. So much so that you cannot not tell anyone that this issue should be looked at more objectively. There was this article in the Hindustan Times which mentioned which state three of our slain soldiers belonged to. While most of the people commenting on the story were asking India to open a war against Pakistan and take not just Kashmir back but also Pakistan over, I had simply commented that mentioning the regions or religions plays to divide people and that what is important is that all the soldiers who lost their lives were brave and courageous. I did not mention "war" or "Pakistan" and was therefore called out as a "bloody liberal Hindu". I think it is insane - the whole reaction to the situation is insane.

I want to understand how waging a war against Pakistan will solve our internal problem of failure of our national intelligence services to identify a security breach. Because that is exactly what this was - a security breach and a mega failure to identify the same. Be it Gurdaspur or Pathankot or Uri, in all cases a bunch of fidayeens not only cross border but enter heavily armed and supposedly secure areas and kill our very well trained soldiers. And what's more abominable is that every successive attack in this series has been deadlier and more ghastly than the previous one. This only means that they are not only growing more confident by the day but they also realise that the Indian Intelligence system is probably not equipped even now to identify the contravention. This is what we need to counter; this is what we need to work out; and this is what we need to tackle right now before the next big lapse and loss of our brave lives. No Sirs and Ma'ams, we don't need a war against Pakistan. We need a drastic and expeditious improvement in our intelligence networks. Let's put our time, effort, money and focus at the right place - at the root cause. The war against Pakistan would only lead to more problems, political, social and financial. Even if we assume we go ahead and accomplish what all Indians are shouting, we take Kashmir back and even add Pakistan to our territory; we would only be bringing in terrorists from across the borders to within are own and that's not a very smart thing to do seriously.

FAQs On Law, Sexual Violence And Section 375 & 376 Of The Indian Penal Code

Disclaimer: This is reproduction of a post on another website / blog. The validity and accuracy has not been verified. For source, please see the link here.

In a recent engagement with people in the comments section of the Facebook page of Feminism in India, it dawned on me that while sexual violence and advocacy for the survivors is a concern for most readers, many readers have questions about legal provisions in India relating to sexual violence. Questions that popped up, included fundamentals like: Exactly what is rape? Are rape laws gender neutral? Does rape require penetration?

Laws are constantly evolving and the criminal justice system often witnesses the complex interplay of many laws, in any given case. Lawyers need to keep themselves updated and study the facts of a case before coming to a legal opinion.

However, for lawyers and non-lawyers alike, who want to have conversations about sexual violence, the law on sexual violence is a very important component. To enable meaningful conversations on the law, everyone, must have access to information on fundamental questions. To that end, this article is a modest attempt at some sort of ‘F.A.Q’, on laws relating to sexual violence in India.  Given the fact that this is a large topic, the posts will be divided up in parts.

This part, will focus on ‘Rape’ as defined in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (Sometimes, as and when relevant it will touch upon some other laws, other Sections, and particularly the POCSO Act).

FAQ 1: Who can commit rape, under the purview of the IPC?

The language of Section 375 of IPC is clear. It begins with ‘A man is said to commit rape if…’

In so prefacing the definition of Section 375, it is clear that in the Scheme of the Indian Penal Code, the perpetrator of rape can only be a man.

However, as far as child victims of sexual abuse are concerned, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, is gender neutral. The offence of penetrative sexual assault (defined in Section 3 of the POCSO Act), is materially equivalent to the offence of rape, as defined in the Indian Penal Code. In case of child sexual abuse, both the victim and the perpetrator can be male or female, and it is in this context that female perpetrators are recognized by the law.

FAQ 2: Who can be the victim of rape, in the eyes of the law?

Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code only recognizes women as survivors of rape. The POCSO Act does recognize that any child (irrespective of gender) can be the victim of penetrative sexual assault. However, this leaves out adult male survivors of penetrative sexual assault, who the law does not recognize, as victims of rape.

Adult male survivors of penetrative sexual assault, as a category, are left out of the ambit of Section 375 of the IPC. It is a glimpse into the patriarchal construct of our laws that an adult male survivor of penetrative sexual assault will have to take recourse to Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, a relic from a rather draconian past that seeks to punish ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’ and does not differentiate between consenting adults and non-consenting participants. This creates a tragic legal fiction that deems that ‘men can be sodomized but not raped’.

FAQ 3: What acts are required to constitute the act of rape? Is penetration necessary?

Before 2013, the law did not recognize as ‘rape’ incidents of forced anal penetration, or oral sex. This led to an anomalous legal position where if someone was forced to have anal sexual intercourse, they could only be charged under Section 377 of the IPC, and not for rape. This had a significant impact on the Aruna Shanbaug case, where the perpetrator was never charged under Section 377 IPC, reportedly to save the fiancé of the victim from ‘embarrassment’. The perpetrator was convicted or attempted murder and robbery.

With the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 2013, the ambit of the term rape in the IPC was broadened to include many categories other than ‘penile-vaginal’ penetration. Four categories of actions are recognized as constituting rape, when done without the consent of the woman:

When a man penetrates, to any extent, of themouth, vagina, urtethra or anus of a woman or makes the woman do so with him or anyone else. (The vagina includes the labia majora)	Inserts, to any extent, an object or a body part, not being the penis, into the aforementioned orifices, or makes her do so with him or any other person.
Manipulates any part of the body of the woman so as to cause penetration into the said orifices, or makes her do so with him or any other person.	Applies his mouth to said orifices of a woman or makes her do so with him, or any other person.  (Note: No form of penetration is required here)

FAQ 4: What does consent mean?

Section 375, goes into great detail on the question of consent. When an act falling within any of the four categories is done, under any of the following conditions, it constitutes rape:

Conditions under which the 4 categories of acts constitute rape.

1. Against the will of the woman.
2. Without her consent.
3. With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
4. With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be law­fully married.
5. With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupe­fying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
6. With or without her consent, when she is under eighteen years of age.
7. When she is unable to communicate her consent.

Ok, but what does consent mean?

Consent, as laid down in Section 375 of the IPC, means an ‘unequivocal voluntary agreement’ when the woman by ‘words, gestures or any form of verbal or non-verbal communication’, communicates willingness to participate in the specific sexual act.

The Indian Supreme Court has clarified that ‘against her will’ and ‘without her consent’, are two distinct categories, though there might be an area of overlap between then. The phrase against her will, connotes an act of sexual intercourse committed despite a woman’s resistance and opposition. Consent on the other hand, according to the Indian Supreme Court, implies an act of reason accompanied by deliberation.

The Indian Penal Code makes it abundantly clear that the fact of a woman not physically resisting the act of penetration shall not by the reason only of that fact indicate consenting to the sexual activity. Merely submitting to sexual assault (for example due to fear), without putting up a physical resistance, does not amount to consent.

It might be interesting here to mention the Mathura case, a case that remains a blot on Indian legal history. This 1972 case involved the custodial rape of a tribal girl, by two police constables. The alleged perpetrators were acquitted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The decision betrayed a confusion about the difference between submitting to an act of sex, andconsenting to it.

In inferring that the 16-year-old girl ‘consented’ to the activity, the court relied upon factors such as “stiff resistance having been put up by the girl is all false” and the “alleged intercourse was a peaceful affair”.

In an open letter, written to the Chief Justice of India, by leading Indian academics (it is worth a read and can be found here) the underlying assumptions of this judgment were challenged. One paragraph of this letter, hits the nail on the head with regard to the meaning of consent, and I have quoted it below:

“There is a clear difference in law, and common sense, between ‘submission’ and ‘consent’. Consent involves submission; but the converse is not necessarily true. Nor is absence of resistance necessarily indicative of consent. It appears from the facts as stated by the Court and its holdings that there was submission on the part of Mathura. But where was the finding on the crucial element of consent?”

Let us now look at some other questions that are frequently asked on the issue of rape, particularly about the quantum of punishment for it.

FAQ 5: What is the punishment for rape? Is there a more severe punishment for rape committed in certain circumstances?

Offence	Punishment	Relevant Section
Rape	Not less than seven years, may extend to life, with fine.	See Section 376 IPC
Rape by a) Police officer -1) Within police station -2) Premises of any station house -3) On a woman in the custody of the police officer or his subordinate b) A public servant on a woman in his or his subordinate’s custody c) A rape committed by a member of the armed forces deployed in an area by the Central or State Government, in such an area. d) Rape committed by a person in the management of or staff of a hospital, remand home, jail, women’s institution, children’s institution, or any such place of custody. e) Rape committed by a relative, guardian, teacher, or a person in a position of authority over the woman f) Rape committed during communal or sectarian violence g) Rape committed on a woman, knowing her to be pregnant. h) Rape committed on a woman under sixteen. i) Rape committed on a woman who is incapable of giving consent. j) Rape committed when the perpetrator is in a position of control or dominance over the woman k) Rape committed on a woman suffering from a mental or physical disability. l) Rape committed on the same woman repeatedly m) Causing grievous hurt, disfigurement, maiming, or endangering the life of a woman during the commission of rape.	Rigorous imprisonment for not less than ten years, which may extend to life (which shall mean the remainder of that person’s natural life) and fine	See Section 376 IPC
Persistent vegetative state or death caused in the commission of rape	Not less than 20 years, may extend to life (which shall mean the remainder of that person’s natural life) or with death	See Section 376 A
Gang-rape	Not less than 20 years, may extend to life (which shall mean the remainder of that person’s natural life) and fine	See Section 376 D

FAQ 6: What is a gang-rape? Does each member of the group or gang have to commit sexual assault in order to face punishment?

Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code lays down that ‘Where a woman is raped by one or more persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished ….’

This provision for gang-rape recognizes that it is not necessary for each person in the group to actually commit the crime of rape, to have high degree of culpability. The law penalizes any activity done in furtherance of the common intention of the group as if it was the offence of rape itself. This would mean that even persons who stand guard over doors, or hold the victim own cannot get away with a lighter punishment by claiming that they did not actually commit the sexual assault.

FAQ 7: Is there a more severe punishment for repeat offenders?

Section 376E of the Indian Penal Code states that whoever has been previously convicted of an offence punishable under Section 376 or section 376A or section 376D (i.e. committing rape, causing death or vegetative state in the course of committing rape or committing gang-rape) and is subsequently convicted of an offence punishable under any of the said sections shall be punished with imprisonment for life (which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life) or with death. Note that this section requires a previous conviction to be present, followed by a subsequent conviction.

These are some questions on rape and the law that we thought were relevant. As mentioned before, this body of law is large, and some things can get left out, keeping in mind the demands of brevity and readability. If there was something you wanted to know, that we have not addressed, feel free to shoot out more questions, and we will try to answer them to the best of our abilities.

Olympians: Our poster children for "Save the Girl Child" campaign?

In the days ensuing the Olympics, our two medallists (Sakshi Malik and PV Sindhu) and two almost

medallist (Dipa Karmarkar and Aditi Ashok) have been relegated to eternal glory. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. They deserve every bit of the adulation (and maybe we would have seen more such enterprising athletes if the attention is given before the games rather than after it.) But, then they were started to be linked to the “Save the girl child campaign”. So much so that, we all made them intentional / unintentional poster children of the campaign. The fact that it takes Olympic medals to justify saving our girl children is a horrific idea indeed. Every life deserves to live and the “Save the girl child campaign” was brought to the fore because the girls were faring much worse in the infanticide statistics. Don’t they deserve to be saved even if there are no Olympic medals to point out that girls bring laurels to our country? The fact that it is a life – a living breathing soul – gives them a right to live whether or not there are poster children to support justification of their existence.

Please do not get me wrong. I do not intend to say that we should ignore the glories the girls brought to our country. But that glory should be used as a justification to encourage sports and its wider reach. Female infanticide, however, is a different matter altogether – which deserves equal attention but the right kind of attention. Linking the two issues dilutes their importance and the attention they both require. Why are we sending out a wrong message? That till a girl wins a medal, her birth and her existence do not merit automatic celebration. So the message is, “Don’t kill your daughters not because they are human beings and have as much as value as your sons; but because they may someday become potential medal winners.”

Some social media enthusiasts even went ahead and dug out a picture of PV Sindhu in traditional saree regalia to demonstrate that she could carry the weight of tradition and wield an Olympic medal winning badminton racquet with equal pride. Don’t be fooled by the short skirt and the unapologetic aggression on court, it was suggested. This girl respects boundaries. The kind that really matter. What a tragedy to provide such justification to people who are still hell-bent on seeing women play the traditional roles of the society no matter how much they prove themselves capable of something. This reminds me of the now famous Sania Mirza interview where Rajdeep Sardesai proved his very

orthodox mindset by asking a very sexist question about motherhood and settling down; a question she didn’t take too lightly. The popular anchor in the end acknowledged it wasn’t something he might ask a male athlete. But, it took a usually calm and composed tennis ace to slam him down to make him realize his folly. The issue is that no matter how progressive they pretend to be, this is exactly what comes naturally to people whereas feminism needs to drilled down their throats.

Let’s give credit to PV Sindhu, Sakshi Malik, Dipa Karmakar, Aditi Ashok and Sania Mirza where it’s due without appropriating them to any campaigns. They are just doing the best they can to realize their ambitions and to excel in their chosen disciplines regardless of the cultural, political and sociological tampering that goes on around their gender. An ambitious woman in any case is an anomaly till she makes it big and then everybody wants a little piece of her. Then she becomes an emblem of something that is obviously bigger than her. The country, culture and conditioning that have impeded her growth now want credit for her success just by association.

Bringing up our sons like our daughters: Is it too much to ask?

Early morning as I sipped my tea and browsed through my Facebook timeline, I read a post on one of the "Mom" groups I follow. The post was as follows (and I quote verbatim):

One of my students, is about to play the nationals in football. When she broke the news yesterday, naturally there were cheers all around, except for a boy. He just could not believe that girls could play football and this good.
Bend it like Beckam has not reached his house obviously.
This response is surprising as he is part of an affluent society and has travelled abroad.
Somethings can never change? I refuse to believe!
Can we as Mothers, do our bit for gender bending?
No saying " Don't cry like a girl!"
"Don't sit like a boy! Sit like a lady!"
"Don't be a wimp!"
"What are you doing with needles and thread?That is a girl's domain"
"Learn to cook! What will happen to you after marriage?"
"Bulk up! You are a boy!! And Ditch those hideous pastels"
"Watch your weight! Be dainty and dress in pretty pinks"
Bunkum!
Teach both boys and girls to be life ready. Teach them how to budget, cook, wash, iron, mop and dust.

Image courtesy: Google search

Just as I read through the post, I realised that it is very easy for me to appreciate what had been written and even practice it because I am a mother of a girl. As our society gets educated and mindsets change, we start equating our girls with boys and bring them up like boys. I never tell my daughter to sit like a girl, not play heavy-duty sports or learn to cook. I do tell her that you'll have to learn to drive when you grow up and look for a job and be independent. But, I think that is the easy part - bringing up our daughters like our sons; calling them beta or "you are a son to me". The difficult part is bringing up our boys like girls. I think as mothers, it is our duty to ensure that we sensitise our sons also like our daughters. THAT I think is the more important bit and that is yet to happen even in the educated society.

In fact, as I browsed through the comments of the said post, I noticed how all people - and all were WOMEN themselves - were only talking about how they are ensuring that their daughters are being raised like sons. Not a single lady mentioned how their sons are being raised like daughters. It's kind of sad to me.

We have to realise that the responsibility of equality is equally if not more on a mother of a son. The whole dynamics of our society as it exists today has to change and the mothers will eventually have to pick up this baton to bring this change; especially the mothers of boys.

The Kashmir debate!

Disclaimer: This post is as non-political as it could be. It is neither an analysis of the situation in Kashmir, nor an on opinion on who is correct and who isn't. And this post definitely does not propagate, cultivate or promote any solution to the current situation. This is simply my own opinion on the debate around Kashmir that is going on. Read at your own risk!

Everybody knows the situation in Kashmir today where the locals are clashing with the Indian Army post the killing of Burhan Wani, the commander of Kashmiri militant group Hizbul Mujahideen whose social media campaign had an outreach among a section of Kashmiri Muslim youth. He was killed in an encounter with the Indian security forces on 8 July 2016. He is being claimed as a martyr by the radical Muslim groups and their supporters now.

I have a very clear viewpoint about the Kashmir situation. I support the rights of Kashmiri Pandits and I do feel that they deserve their homes back. I am also against Article 370 and I feel that Kashmir (at least the part under the Indian Control) is part of India and should have the same laws of the land, and same rights as well, as the rest of India. But looking at the current situation where people of Kashmir are supporting the neighbouring country and openly supporting the terror groups, I think there is no option but to run it the way it has been running for last many years.

However, recent events are really sad. The way people have come out in protest over killing of a terrorist is shocking. News channels, social media and even people here are sympathising with Wani. And for me this is somewhat unfathomable. I fail to understand how someone can support a terrorist. Would you support someone who tries to divide your home into two? Would you support someone who drives you or your family out of your house? Would you support someone who tries to kill your family members? And in such a scenario would you not do anything, and by all means anything to protect yourself and your family, even if it means seriously hurting or killing the perpetrator? I would. You would too.

Anyway, Kashmir is a very sensitive topic and I generally not talk about it openly; not because I'm scared but because I don't want to hurt the sentiments of some of my friends who feel opposite of what I feel albeit just as strongly if not more. It's almost like commenting on your family or home. I am a proud Indian and most of the times I cannot tolerate anybody showing my country in poor light. (I'm the kind that when everybody hailed Slumdog Millionaire, I on the contrary felt offended by such a mean and depressive generalisation of my country when there's so much more to it than the slums of Dharavi.) So, I can understand what Kashmiris feel about Kashmir.

But having said that, my opinion about Burhan Wani and all so called "freedom warriors" as well as the media and people supporting them is exactly how Arnab Goswami had put in words on his TV show recently.

As I said I restrain on commenting or arguing on posts supporting Kashmir militancy. But one of these days, I could not restrain myself. All over Facebook I saw posts dedicated to Aamir Nazir, a young gentleman killed in police firing to dispel the protestors. (Well, kindly ignore the word gentleman as I myself have my doubts about his gentleness really). So in one of the posts that implied that he was an innocent person killed by the armed forces, I happened to point out that there were army personnel and even their families which were being attacked as well and they are just as human as Aamir Nazir, if we even for the sake of the argument assume that he was just an innocent bystander. (In the police version, Aamir had pelted stones on the armed personnel but the people supporting Aamir claim that the Government of a India is forcing media to publish this "fabricated story"). Guess what happened, I was trolled and even called out using abusive language despite the fact that I had even very politely mentioned that I had no intention to argue and that I respect the other person's viewpoint. Yes, that happens to normal people like me too and not just celebrities.

Then today I saw these videos where the images which the media doesn't show were highlighted. Videos which shows how the so called innocents are pelting stones, sticks and torches on the armed forces. The soldiers of the Indian Army who have no personal interest and are doing all this for the country and for us are bearing the brunt of the "misguided people". I hope these people some day understand what is good for them and choose peace and choose their own country. Till then and forever, I proudly stand by the Indian Army.

Watch the video here.

Bhai ko toh 100 khoon maaf hain!!

Salman Khan is an absolute embodiment of how a man should not be. Not only is he woman disrespecting, violent, human and animal killing criminal with deeply regressive and repulsive views, but he is also an egotistical, self-centred, spoilt brat who believes he can get away with anything. But what is worse is that he can and has actually gotten away with anything. He has indeed gotten away with things that normally destroy and ruin others.

He has gotten away with drunk driving leading to killing of people with nothing more than a few visits to court and a spend of about Rs. 25 crores, which is hardly about one-eighth of what each of his films earn and far less than what he himself charges for each film. He did not even spend one night in lock-up. And yet on the day the court was to pass their judgement on the case, social media was roaring in support of the killer and not the victim.

When Salman Khan was accused by his ex-girlfriend, Aishwarya Rai, of harassing her, thus adding on to previous claims of physical violence against his other ex-girlfriends Somi Ali and even Sangeeta Bijlani; the same millions of people who talk against domestic violence and crimes against women, stood by him and degraded Aishwarya Rai to be a scheming, conniving and vile woman who used Vivek Oberoi and Abhishek Bachchhan to get rid of Salman Khan. (And I wouldn't blame her even if she did use them after all it is not easy to get rid of Salman Khan).

Even as he was convicted of killing an animal of an endangered species, his bhakts chose to describe him as a very sensitive and empathetic person who is a gift to humanity because he floated a NGO by the name of Being Human. How they all fail to see that it is just a front to improve his public image along with adding on to his earnings via sales of fan merchandise is totally beyond me.

Everybody knew about his underworld links and yet Preity Zinta was chastised for speaking up against her fellow industry people. And it wasn't just Preity Zinta, anyone who speaks up against Salman Bhai ends up with a doomed career no matter what a powerhouse of talent he/she is - à la Vivek Oberoi. This talent-less, spoilt brat who has gotten to where he is only because of who he's related and connected to and what some may describe as good looks, somehow has the power to ruin careers of people much more talented and deserving than himself.

If we look at the recent events, he has the gall to imply that he is qualified to be India's ambassador to the Olympics, when he had no sports accomplishments to his name; he has the guts to say that women are vices, when he is a famed womaniser and casanova himself; he had the ill sense of claiming that Yakub Memon is innocent and that he should not be hanged for the acts of his brother Tiger Memon, when the Apex court had ruled otherwise; and he actually had the audacity to compare the fatigue of shooting for a film, that he shouldn't even have been part of, to feeling like a raped woman, when he himself is a brother of two women on whom he declares he dotes. But he got away with everything. The egotistical bum he is, he didn't even apologise for his insensitive remarks, and his father apologised on his behalf. Now, he is not some 5-year old kid that his parents had to apologise for his thoughtless deeds. He is a 50-year old man who is revered by millions and billions of people and who should be focusing on rather becoming an example to be emulated. Yet he steered clear even when he was directly asked if he thought what he said was wrong.

But, the question is why can he get away with all this and more? Why when even stupid references to intolerance by Shah Rukh Khan and Aamir Khan land them in trouble and lead their films to failure, Salman Khan lands up with a bigger hit than before? Why do the same people - media, radio jockeys, normal people - who criticise him for his unpardonable remark suddenly start hailing him when his movie releases and even claims that he has "shut his critics' mouths" with his performance. (And for the record, I haven't seen Sultan and I have no intention to, but even then I can give it on a stamp paper that it cannot be some Oscar worthy performance coming out from Salman). Why does a talented person like Arijit Singh have to apologise to him on a public forum fearing that his career will be finished merely by offending Salman? Why is a woman like Sona Mohapatra, who actually takes a stand and calls Salman out for his deeds, has to face harassment from haters and trolls calling her R****, W****, S***, and what not? Why do industry big-wigs - like Farhan Akhtar, Mahesh Bhatt, Anurag Kashyap, Alyque Padamsee - who take a stand on almost everything keep quiet when it comes to Salman Bhai and on the contrary support him and share the stage with him on International Forums like IIFA?

Who has given that kind of power to one person?

The answer is simple: Us! We the people! Salman Khan is surrounded by scores of sycophants who will never go against him. He has an army of bhakts, who probably don't worship him despite his transgressions, but because of them, since he, with all his undeserved privilege, is the living embodiment of all that they want to be. And the billions of fans, who turn their blind eye to all his vices and hail him like anything. We the people have ignored Bollywood's reprehensible nepotism for decades, and now we're at a point where this man's clout makes the industry's most talented people - singers, music directors, actors and especially actresses - grovel before him fearing that they will lose his fans if they take a stand against him. We the people have catapulted him to a position where nothing he can do can possibly affect him, since he has the might and power to get away with anything.

But the fact is that it says more about us as a society than about this one man who is merely using the power we have given him. Yeah, he is laughing and the joke is really on us here!

Trivialising 'Rape': The joke's on us!

Salman Khan has stirred up a controversy again. In a recent interview where he wanted to publicise his upcoming movie Sultan, he had this to say about the rigorous training schedule he followed, "When I used to walk out of the ring, after the shoot, I used to feel like a raped woman. I couldn’t walk straight. I would eat and then, head right back to training. That couldn’t stop."

This is one of the most disgusting statements I have heard. The trauma, the stigma, the feeling of desperateness and invasion of privacy, and the humiliation that comes with being a rape survivor is something no one can understand, least of all a privileged rich brat with a history of abuse and other criminal offences. Rape jokes aren't funny, nor is using the word raped as an adjective for a training that he chose to do in a film that will only make money for him and get him more fanatical respect from his fans, neither of which he actually deserves.

He did not stop there as he continued to describe "women" as a "vice" he is unable to quit. "Leave every second vice in your list – that’s the mantra I follow. And I have left everything one by one. When it was between coffee and cigarettes, I quit coffee. Between cigarettes and drinks, I quit the stick. Between the drinks and women, I have chosen women. Ab iske baad duniya chhod do." How saintly is that? Leaving all "vices" except "women"? But then you can't expect anything better from Salman Khan. After all he is a brain-dead, woman beating, human and animal killer who thrives on egotism of being worshipped as a cult. He's only being human. He's the Bhai. He's special.

And guess what? There are still thousands of fans out there who are justifying his statement; a disgusting statement for which he did not even apologize. His father apologized on his behalf saying he has been misunderstood. He has definitely been misunderstood by his fans who fail to see what a prick he is. People who think that Salman Khan is really just a misunderstood adorable pumpkin. They think that Salman bhai is embroiled in controversy yet again because the media has nothing better to do except call out problematic statements by influential stars. Them, jobless media people. While the world may be against this adorable fluffy little unicorn, who graces the world with his unmatched wisdom every time he opens his mouth, they totally support him. No matter what happens, these people are going to stand by him. Good idea... Because standing in front of him might get them killed.

But then, is it only about Salman Khan? Are the people around us any better? May be not all of them are sexist and misogynist little chums but there are definitely many people - both men and women - who trivialise grave issues like rape. Our politicians are living examples as they time and again come up with awesome examples of senseless and insensitive comments about rape. And why only them? There are many instances where the educated young people have trivialised rape.

I remember the Brazil vs Germany football match on 8 July 2014 at the Estádio Mineirão in Belo Horizonte, Brazil where Germany crushed Brazil with a 7-1 defeat. The match was such a shocker. However, for me, the dismay wasn’t because Brazil lost (it’s only a game after all, and countries win and lose all the time; it’s nothing new), it was more so due to the reaction elicited among many fans, especially over social media. They went so far as to state the most despicable of all metaphors in existence, "Germany raped Brazil". This inappropriate metaphor was especially ubiquitous over Twitter, where many people unabashedly and deliberately used the term rape over and over again. One only had to type the aforementioned phrase in the search bar to be suddenly bombarded with hundreds and thousands of repugnant tweets. And the most insensitive ones were followed by laughing smileys and "HAHAHA"s. What was more disturbing was how very liberal and educated and thinking people went about sharing these jokes and metaphors which seemed to make rape seem lighthearted and funny.

Don't we all need to retain some perspective? Rape is never funny. It's a barbaric act of violence against someone. For days the question kept bothering me - since when did rape become a referral to something good? Something positive? I understood that the people who used this reference meant to use it in the context that it was intended to be used; to mean that Germany was so good, talented and so powerful that they "raped" Brazil, which obviously meant that Brazil was the "weaker" team. After all, isn’t that exactly how "being raped" works? A powerful individual forces himself on a weaker individual, snatching and taking whatever he wants using threats and violence, leaving the victim helpless and humiliated.

What was and is even more disconcerting is that there are many who completely dismiss this crude metaphor by calling it a mere "joke" and making it seem like "it’s not a big deal" at all. How is it not a big deal when sexual violence, especially against women, is highly prevalent in the entire world? Every country of the world can demonstrate shameful statistics for sexual assaults against one half of their society. How much more repulsive does this need to get? 

I personally believe that the issue with people using the term "rape" so carelessly and heartlessly - as a joke or a metaphor or an adjective - is that they either aren’t aware or have deliberately turned a blind eye to the poignant problem of the prevailing rape culture and the fact that it's not only prevalent in India but all over the world. Rape is not a joke and should never be treated as such. So, to all you people who constantly use or have used the term "rape" to refer to something "positive", don’t use it! It’s not funny and it does not by any means sound cool. It also certainly does not demonstrate the "hard work that you need to put into something". You can argue all you want and tell me that rape in the contexts used as above doesn’t sound bad, but the truth is that it does. It sounds very ugly and dehumanising. Besides, there are far better and more appropriate words that could have been used instead to describe Germany's win against Brazil or the agonising drill Salman Khan had to go through. Rape, however, is not and never will be one of them.

I am my father’s daughter

From simple things like loving songs with Punjabi flavour,

Image Source: Google search

To securing a seat behind the wheel;
From not spending the weekends at home,
To enjoying a sumptuous Indian meal.
My likes and dislikes are same as his;
So are my quirks.
I am my father’s daughter,
And for me it works.

They tell me I am a strong person.
They tell me I am a fighter.
They tell me I don’t get stirred,
Even when my challenges get tougher.
They don’t know this yet,
But I can tell them now.
I am my father’s daughter,
They won’t be surprised if they knew.

Never the one to back-off,
Never the one to fear.
No matter what lies ahead;
Bring it on, my dear.
That was the kind of man he was,
That is what I aspire to.
I am my father’s daughter,
And a damn proud one too.

© Nishtha Khurana, 2016. All rights reserved.

Let’s change the way the world treats daughters AND SONS!

I am a daughter too. But I was given a beautiful environment to grow up in. I was never ever made to feel any different from anyone else. There is a difference when someone is brought up in a secure and loved environment. I grew up to be an independent person who looked at everyone with an equal eye. And as I was growing up, I thought it was so everywhere but reality is so different. Because then I came out of the shelter and walked the streets of my city. 

Any girl who has ever walked the streets of a city (any city and not just the ones in India though the Indian cities are quite notorious) will understand what ‘prowling eyes’ mean and even what groping feels like. I am sure every woman in any part of the world has encountered that flasher when they travel to school or have been greeted with catcalls when they have gone anywhere unescorted. Even I did. Then there were those who would accidentally brush past you. If anyone mustered the courage to complain, they would look at you with a glint in the eye and have the guts to say, ‘Go on, tell everyone what happened’. It is disgusting.

Girls are asked a thousand questions, boys are not asked to explain anything. Don’t you think it’s time to change that? I would say that the need to feel safe is everyone’s right. No one is anyone’s property. And no one should be made to feel that way either. We need to start doing things differently. First and foremost, talk about eve teasing and groping openly. No one should hesitate to ‘tell everyone what happened’. And everyone needs to tell the girls so. Tell them that it is alright to not take harassment face down. Tell them that it is those who harass you who should feel ashamed and not you. Children learn by observing adult behaviour. Gender stereotypes have to be broken right then.

And most importantly, have a conversation with your sons. An open and honest conversation. Explain to them the concept of consent. Tell them that it’s not ‘cool’ to lust at girls. Respecting them is much ‘cooler’ – respecting them just as they respect fellow boys. Tell them catcalls will not get them anywhere worthy in life. Tell them that all human beings are equal and have equal place in the sun. Don’t we all tell all this to our daughter’s nowadays? Why can’t we tell the same thing to our sons?

As Gloria Steinem puts it, “We've begun to raise daughters more like sons... but few have the courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.” That exactly is the need of the hour.

Let’s change the way the world treats daughters AND SONS!

Standard Procedure: Harass Divorced People

Disclaimer: I am not sure whether divorced males also go through the same harassment. For all I know, they might. Hence, I am keeping this article as gender neutral as possible. However, I must warn you that since it is based on my personal experiences, some people might find it reeking with ‘Feminism’.

Situation 1

After being forced to include my 'spouse's name' in my passport just two months before my mutual consent divorce at the time of renewal, I was now faced with a situation where I had to get it removed now that the divorce was finalized. Because of the harrowing experience I had had with the authorities, I had managed to procrastinate and put it off as much as I could, but I realized that I had to eventually get it done. I found out about an agent who helped with anything related to passport. So, basically he charged me a fee and he filled my application, paid passport fee, secured an appointment and arranged my documents (read checked whether I have arranged all required documents). I handed him my documents in the third week of February.

Me: How long does this take? I am asking because I will have to travel sometime in last week of May and will also need time for Visa.

Agent: Oh! May is too far yet. The process nowadays is very quick. I’ll arrange your appointment within a week, and we will apply for a "post-verification". So, you will have your passport within 4 days of your appointment. The police verification will keep on happening later.

The sly agent then kept making excuses and only managed an appointment for 11th April.

Me: Isn't it too close for travel? What if there's a delay?

Agent: Naa, naa! You don’t worry! I know people there. We will apply for a "post-verification". So, you will have your passport within 4 days of your appointment.

So, I went for my appointment. Luckily, contrary to my previous experience, the appointment went very smoothly. I expected some nasty questions about my divorce but there were absolutely none. I was happy about the whole routine; until I got the acknowledgement for my application, that is, for my acknowledgement clearly mentioned "pre-verification". Almost panicking, I called my agent who very conveniently hadn't even shown up at the 'Passport Seva Kendra' (PSK) that day.

Me: Madan* ji, my acknowledgement says "pre-verification". I thought you applied for "post-verification".

Agent: Naa naa ji, I cannot choose that option while applying. They themselves decide.

Me: But, what do we do now? I have to travel in the last week of May and I will need 15-20 days for the Visa as well.

Agent: Oh ho, don't worry! Just relax! Nowadays passports come well before 30 days. You'll have enough time for the Visa.

Me: That's okay. But what if it doesn't? I don’t want to be tethered to the hook till the last minute.

Agent: Nothing like that would happen. I am there naa? I will get everything sorted.

As it happened, my passport did not come back till 40 days and while my agent blissfully gave me excuses and stories, I was running between Police Station to Passport Verification Cell in the Commissioner's office and pleading just about anyone for expediting the process including the very efficient and tech-savvy MEA and RPO on twitter. (Well, a short note of thanks to them who eventually printed and dispatched me the passport within hours after police verification report was submitted.) All this while, I called my agent at least thrice everyday only to have the same conversation every time.

Me: Madan ji, what’s the status?

Agent: Ma'am, the status is same. The police verification report is pending.

Me: Please do something. I need my passport.

Agent: Ma'am, what can I do? I have no control over the police verification report.

Me: You got me into it. You filed the application so late and then you didn't even get it in "post-verification" like you promised.

Agent: I never promised "post-verification". Your case is not even eligible for "post-verification".

Me: What do you mean?

Agent: Ma'am, divorce cases never go for "post-verification" or "tatkal". They only go for "pre-verification".

Me: What? What stupidity is that? What does my divorce have to do with police verification? The police will not check my marital status. They only ask for address proof, identity proof and signatures of two neighbours stating that I live where I say I live.

Agent: I know ma'am. But it is always so in legal matters.

Me: Legal matters? There is no legal matter here. It's all sorted and I have submitted a decree of divorce from a competent court as part of my documents. Am I some criminal or what?

Agent: I can understand ma'am. But it is what it is. Divorce cases never go for "post-verification" or "tatkal". That’s standard procedure.

Seething with fury, I shut up because I knew that nothing could be done now. What hurts is that not only I am being harassed because I am divorced, but even my child is not "eligible" to get her passport under "post-verification" or "tatkal" ever because of her parent’s marital status. And she didn't even choose our divorce. But, that is standard procedure. 

Situation 2

The very next day of getting my passport in hand, I apply for the business visa. The guidelines say that there should be clear 10 working days between the date of application and the date of travel. In my case, it is at best 10 days and not 10 working days. Still my company pulls some strings through their headquarters in the country I want to visit and my application gets accepted and I am called in the VFS to submit my documents. The agents there are generally helpful and friendly and they tell me that my documents are in order until one of them (let's call him Agent 1) scans through my application to see whether it’s complete:

Agent 1: Ma'am, are you divorced?

Me: Yes.

Agent 1: Ma'am, have you attached a proof of divorce?

Me: No.

Agent 1: Ma'am, we would need a proof of divorce from you. Are you carrying it?

Me: No. It was not mentioned in the list of documents on your website or by the travel agent my company deals with.

Agent 1: Not an issue ma'am. I will give you my email id, you can mail it to me today. I assume it would be a decree of divorce that you will have.

Me: Sir, I'm sorry, but, I don't understand. Why do you need my decree of divorce? What does it have to do with my travel? I am applying for a business visa. I am travelling for company work on a trip entirely paid for by my company. I am not even mixing it with leisure or tourism. And I have provided you all documents to substantiate that. Where does decree of divorce come into the picture?

Agent 1: Yes, ma'am; but we need a proof of your marital status.

Me: Do you ask for marriage certificates from people who are married?

Agent 1 burst into a laughter and then looks at the serious expression on my face and controls himself.

Me: You think I am being funny?

Agent 1: No ma'am.

Me: So, please answer my question. Do you ask for marriage certificates from people who are married? Or unmarried people for that matter? Do you ask them to prove they are unmarried?

Agent 1: No ma'am.

Me: No. You don't ask for proof of marital status from married or unmarried people then why do you need proof of marital status from me? Right now, I'm single or unmarried. That's it.

Agent 1: Look ma'am, I can understand that you are upset about being asked for a document that is not mentioned in the list. 

Me: Look sir, you need to understand that I am upset about being asked for a document that has got nothing to do with my business trip and moreover that is not asked from other people at all. I do not understand why my case should be treated any differently.

Agent 1 is quiet and looks lost but he still manages an answer: Yes ma'am, but it is standard procedure.

"Standard procedure" again; and by now I am fairly pissed off. But I shut up because I need my Visa to be processed as soon as possible and I didn't want to create any situation that may delay the process. 

A while later, my will power is further tested when another agent (let's call him Agent 2) who was standing right behind Agent 1 was asked to hand over a folder so that Agent 1 who was entering my data in the system could put my papers in it. Agent 2 suddenly glances over my marital status just as Agent 1 was turning the page. He stops Agent 1 and puts his finger on the word divorced.

Agent 2: Ugh, ma'am… Are you divorced? Ma'am we would need a proof of your…

Agent 1, looking a bit embarrassed, immediately stops him by hand and fumbles with a weak "I've already told her and she will mail it to me". I just look at him and don't answer. 

Agent 2: Okay. But please do it today itself because we won't be able to process your application otherwise and I see that you need the Visa as early as possible.

Me (impatiently): Okay. If you need it so urgently, I have a scan in my laptop which I have submitted outside at the baggage counter. I can show it to you right away if it's what you want.

Agent 1: No ma'am, no need. You can mail it to me. I've mentioned my email id here.

Agent 1 (now looking at Agent 2 who was unable to understand why I was so irritated): Ma'am will do it today.

Situation 3

This incident is from a year ago and I had vented part of my frustration after the incident in my blogpost here. The incident happened in my daughter's schools (we had just shifted her to a new one) where the school Registrar insisted on biological father's details in school even if the father has had nothing to do with the child, either socially or financially. She maintained that she is just "following the law" and granting rights to the biological parent. No matter how much I tried to reason, she insisted on stating those details on ID Cards, Report Cards etc. as a permanent reminder to my child that she has a father who doesn't care at all for her. Well, my daughter has overcome that now but let me tell you that it was very frustrating for her initially. More so because they held back her ID card and Almanac until I relented and allowed them in writing to put the name in their records and even "reimbursed" the costs they had incurred on printing the "incorrect ID Cards" (And there were 3 of them including Parents ID Cards). Talk about blackmailing!

Anyway, at that time, they had convinced me – verbally of course because they never give any such commitment in writing – that for all practical purposes I would be the guardian and my details would be used. Then, three months down the line, we received a "Doctor-on-call" card from school which states the person to be contacted and their details in case of any emergency, primarily medical, that the child may be in. The card conveniently carried the father's details there.

Needless to say I was irked and I showed up at the Registrar office with the card.

Me (after explaining the situation): Ma'am, I was promised by you that you will put a remark in my daughter's file that I would be the one who would be referred to in all scenarios as a parent and guardian. What is this all about then?

Registrar (very casually): Relax ma'am! It’s just an oversight.

Me: Oversight? You call this oversight? This card is to be used in a medical emergency. My ex-husband, and I know him better than you, will not react to any such situation you contact him about. Which essentially means that there is no one who will be there if – God forbid – my daughter is in a situation.

Registrar: Ma'am. You are over reacting. We are not responsible for this. We only share details of all students with the outsourced vendor who is the card-issuer and putting the father's name as person to be contacted is just the process they follow. 

Me: Oh really? First, you did not ask my, or for that matter any parent's, consent before sharing my daughter's details with an outsourced vendor. Second, you are making a generalization and define a process whereby only fathers will be contacted in case of emergency. If you are so hell-bent on including both parents' names on the ID card then why not here?

Registrar: Ma'am there is space for only one name on the card.

Me: What? Wow! That baffles me now. You are so particular about "following the law" and then you deny me "equal rights as a guardian" which the SC has allowed me as a mother simply because there’s no space on the card.

Registrar (coolly smiling and thus getting more and more on my nerves): Ma'am, there's nothing of that sort. We respect your rights as a guardian, this is just standard procedure.

Me: Standard procedure?

Registrar: Yes. However, I understand your concern and we attach a lot of importance to that card. So, obviously we would not like the wrong person to be stated on that card. We will take down your request for a new card and we will issue one to you. Please write an application on a plain paper and append that card with it. Then give it to the admin department along with the card charges. That would be Rs. 200/-. Your daughter will get a new card with your details next week.

Although I was boiling with rage here, I shut up because after all it was my daughter's school and I didn't want her to suffer any further. As I patiently wait for the school to put my name instead of my ex-husband's in the fee invoices and receipts as well even after being associated with the school for over a year, I have by now come to terms with the fact that it's nothing but 'standard procedure' and that as long as my office payroll department and the Income Tax Authorities accept them as valid Investment proofs, I should be okay to live with it.

*name changed.