So the court has said that there can’t be a ban on Mumbai’s Bar-Dancers, seeing the flesh trade as “right to take up any profession in India”.
One of our Profs had said that the ban was because these centers had become places of money laundering (black to white), and hence Govt had to ban it, though not mentioning this reason because of legal angles. From what our prof told us and I understood, criminals and businessmen would shower black money at these girls and the bar owners will also earn a cut (which the article tells that govt used to collect crores in taxes which they lost when they were shut down). I didn’t know 100% of the nitty gritties of how these were money laundering centers, but I got what I said above…
Reading some articles which have come up after this court order, strongest supporters of immoral trade are making following points:
1) When bar girls were stopped from their dirty trade, many of them had to commit suicide.
2) When bar girls were stopped from their dirty trade, many of them joined prostitution.
I think the girls who committed suicide after bars were closed, mainly did because they had debts which they could not repay unless they made this kind of money through dancing there. Such professions are not sustainable anyway when they grow old, so someone should study how many of them anyway commit suicide when they age, and how many of them anyway go to join prostitution, the things which are being blamed on this ban on dance bars.
Many of bar dancers were already into prostitution but it is not a black and white situation where police could know for sure who was doing prosti.. and who was not. Most of them join prostitution when they grow old, because they become used to earning like this and also because a large number of their customers are from the underworld, who push them into it. We can recall chandini bar – a movie made on this subject….
Some try to make it a point that all oppisition to dance bars are opposition to “dancing” as an “art. I am not saying that dancing per se is immoral. But this profession of dirty dancing for money is immoral. There is no pride in this profession. Ask any such woman to say in front of the world that she does dirty dancing in a wine bar, in front of her kids and husband. The fact is that most of these girls, especially younger ones, were doing it without telling their families. This is what makes it immoral. My definition essentially is – the fact that these girls are ashamed of their profession tells that it is immoral. Reasons are obvious.
I am not questioning court. Court will see only legal aspect and it may not be illegal, I will accept it. Court says constitution gives everyone right of profession. Even we can say selling kidneys and blood should not be immoral or illegal using same logic. Or selling one’s kids to others should not be illegal using same logic. Debate is not about legality per se. It is about what is general good for society.
Also, it is not true that our constitution gives all freedom to do whatever one likes as profession. That legal right is only for people above 18? Because when children work, it is called child labor and they are banned from working. So even law or Constitution does not allow blind application of such “freedom”. Similarly, there are ethical aspects which law makers won’t understand. If they understand they will make a rule to restrict it (just like they ban child labor). These women don’t dance for fun; they do it because they want money for supporting themselves or their family. It is failure of govt if they can’t offer them a respectful profession. Banning it will simply disallow them one easy option to make quick money in this manner for which they themselves are ashamed of.
We should not generalize dancing in a bar and compare it with other forms of entertainment; or from dancers from the past; dancing as a means of spiritual experience. This profession is anti of anything good with dancing. Dancing in fact is circumstantial, otherwise male dancers could also be employed. Will people throw bundles of notes on male dancers in dance bars? Most of their customers are criminals and from underworld. This profession disallow them a chance into good and respectable professions.
Ask these girls how many of them would want their daughters to become dancers in dance-bars? Such questions help us in better understanding the issue, than generalizing it. We don’t know their life, their hardships, their struggles. If this evil line of business is not available for them, whatever else they will do legally would be more sustainable and rewarding in the long run for them. Let them become housemaids/or make papad achar and sell on the roads. What is wrong in such professions which involve manual work? At least they are not ashamed of what they are. Our baai’s daughter is also a baai and at times they come to our society happily chatting among themselves. Their profession is not evil.
That is the problem with this world: we see something wrong happening, we shall criticize it. But if someone will stop that wrong thing from happening, we shall criticize that person also. Ask any of your friends if he or she would like her daughter to go do dancing in these bars. Try all your convincing powers to make them agree. Will anyone agree? Why? Because all of your friends are mad or something?
In my opinion, it is just too insensitive for people like us (who are not bar dancers) to support such bars and dancing to run. We are being too insensitive for the plight of those girls who are victim of such trades.
Constitution is for people. People are not for constitution. If we say we have no escape from what was once written in the constitution, it is called dictatorship and tyranny in a way. This is why they have made enough provisions in the constitution to make way for changes. The govt/parliament is accountable to people; this is why they are given this power to make laws while courts are not given this power. It seems you have a fixed notion that morality can’t exist (because some guys from arabian desert have different morals which they can also assert to exist if we agreed that morality existed); all things in this world are only personal opinion and views (because some groups have conflicting views and everything is debatable); and nothing can ever be banned (just because some people will ask for banning good things also). So where do we go? We should not confuse freedom from anarchy. As I said this trade is immoral and hence banning it is not wrong. Calling it immoral is not my opinion – as anyone “would yous end your daughter there?” and count how many call it “not immoral” then.
I think since these were banned and all stakeholders have come to terms with their non-existence, the court should not start it all over. It is immoral and unethical trade and should not be allowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment