Exploring the Toxicity of Narratives About Female Politicians in India
On 23 January 2020, Amnesty International released a seminal report, entitled “Troll Patrol India: Exposing Online Abuse Faced by Women Politicians in India,” which explored and analysed the content of tweets mentioning female politicians in the run up to the 2019 Indian General Election. Amnesty volunteers tracked almost 115,000 tweets that mentioned 95 well-known Indian female politicians. Here it was found that a staggeringly high percentage contained either “problematic” content (understood as hurtful or hostile references, such as tweets which reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes) or “abusive” content (understood as references that directly promote violence or otherwise threaten people based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity). The release of the report sparked a much-needed conversation about the toxicity of the public discourse that surrounds female politicians in India. The aim of this article is not to rehash these conversations, but rather to explore the findings of the report and to examine the nexus between these findings and the disempowering narratives that marginalise and undermine female public figures more generally in India.
Examining online abuse against female politicians in India
While it is certainly true that female politicians around the world often face online abuse, the Amnesty report found that Indian female politicians are subject to almost twice as much online abuse as their counterparts in the UK or the USA. Previous studies conducted by Amnesty utilising the same methodology over longer periods concluded that 7.2% of tweets in the UK and 7.9% of tweets in the USA mentioning female politicians were “problematic” or “abusive.” By contrast, 13.8% of all tweets mentioning female politicians in question in India were “problematic” or “abusive.” In practice, this equated to more than 1 million abusive tweets sent during the three-month period between March and May 2019. Put another way, there were more than 10,000 “abusive” or "problematic" tweets during this period which mentioned the 95 female politicians featured in the Amnesty report—an average of 113 tweets per politician per day. Amnesty's underlying analysis revealed that 1 in 5 of these tweets were sexist or misogynistic, and over 10% of these tweets directly made physical or sexual threats.
In recent days, much of the coverage of Amnesty's report has understandably focused on the scale of the online abuse that female politicians in India face, but little coverage has been dedicated to the fact that intersectional female politicians and those from marginalised backgrounds in India face even higher levels of abuse. For instance, Muslim female politicians on average received 94.1% more tweets that contained ethnic or religious abuse than female politicians from other religious backgrounds. Equally, prominent female politicians from marginalised castes were 59% more likely to be subjected to caste-based online abuse than those from unknown or higher castes. Interestingly, female politicians representing parties that were not affiliated with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) (the currently ruling party in India) were 56.7% more likely to be subjected to "problematic" or "abusive" tweets than those representing the BJP.
This final statistic gives credence to the view held by some activists and journalists that the BJP's rise to power has resulted in an intolerant and toxic environment for opposition female politicians, many of whom have been increasingly targeted on the basis of their gender and political affiliation. For example, it has been argued by Swati Chaturvedi, the author of the book "I am a Troll: Inside the Secret World of the BJP's Digital Army" based upon first-hand accounts by BJP volunteers, that the BJP has organised volunteers into an online "ecosystem where everything is geared towards attacking people, particularly sexually . . . ." This extends to "defamatory slurs [and] sexual slurs on women, journalists, activists, women politicians.”[1]
While it is difficult to assess the veracity of Chaturvedi's claims, which have always been stringently denied by BJP representatives, it is an undeniable fact that dozens of prominent female journalists, politicians, and lawyers who have criticised the government, including Priyanka Gandhi, Rana Ayyub, Barkha Dutt, Nidhi Razdan, and Kiruba Munusamy have been subjected to rampant online abuse, including death threats and threats of sexual violence. It is little wonder that, in such an environment, the 2016 Indian Parliamentary Union's global report on "Sexism, Harassment and Violence Against Women Parliamentarians" found that almost two-thirds of the female parliamentarians that were surveyed reported that they had been "repeatedly" targeted by humiliating sexist remarks. Significantly, 45% of them had received threats of death, rape, beatings, or kidnapping from members of the public.
However, it would in the author's opinion be overly simplistic to argue (as some have) that the rise of intolerant and misogynistic rhetoric against prominent women in India is solely or largely attributable to partisan politics. To do so would be to ignore the experiences of senior female politicians representing the BJP, including the former Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj, and Shazia Ilmi, both of whom have also been subjected to well-publicised instances of online sexist and misogynistic abuse. Instead, this abuse is better understood as being the symptom of a series of overlapping narratives that collectively disempower women who enter the public arena in India. Many such narratives exist, but the author wishes to focus on two: (i) the tendency to define prominent female figures in familial roles; and (ii) the weaponising of female politicians' appearances.
Examining disempowering narratives: women as "sisters" and "mothers"
Chief among these narratives is the disempowering trend within the language used to describe and promote female politicians in India, which confines successful female politicians to familial roles, such as that of a sister, daughter, or mother. As the author has recounted elsewhere,[2] the incumbent Chief Minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, is popularly nicknamed Didi (elder sister) and the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Jayalalithaa, was nicknamed Amma (mother). Perhaps most notably, India's most successful female politician, former prime-minister Indira Gandhi, was commonly referred to, during the beginning of her political career, as the daughter of India's first prime-minister, before later being nicknamed by her supporters and the media alike as Indira Amma (mother Indira).
It must be acknowledged that, at various times, the aforementioned politicians have in fact used their nicknames proactively as a tool of empowerment, signifying membership of prominent political dynasties (as in the case of Indira Gandhi) or as a symbolic rejection of such dynasties. In depicting herself as an elder sister, Mamata Banerjee often seeks to emphasise that she did not rise to political prominence by virtue of being part of a political dynasty, but instead as an elder sister to all Indian citizens.
Yet despite this, it is the author's view that the common narrative that defines prominent Indian female politicians as mothers, daughters, or sisters is at its core disempowering. This is not only because female politicians are inevitably constrained by such descriptors that connote traditional familial roles, but also because the very act of defining successful female politicians as mothers, daughters, and sisters is itself tinged with an inescapable bias. It denies successful female public figures the right to independent self-definition and instead defines them solely in relation to their siblings, parents, or children.
Examining disempowering narratives: weaponising appearances
Secondly, while certainly not unique to India, there is an established tendency within India to disproportionately focus on the sartorial choices of prominent female politicians, as well as their appearances. Female politicians are all too often judged and subjected to attacks which centre on their appearances rather than on matters of political principle and competence. It came as no surprise when, in the run up to the Uttar Pradesh assembly polls in 2017, a senior BJP leader, Vinay Katiyar, remarked that his party had "more beautiful star campaigners"[3] than Priyanka Gandhi. Ms. Gandhi had already been the subject of a 2012 piece published in the Daily Mail, entitled "The power dressing queen: Priyanka Gandhi brings her sartorial style to the election trail," which neither attempted to examine her political goals nor critically assess her proposals, but focused solely on her "signature style" of outfits. Such articles have become increasingly commonplace, with one now notorious example from India.com in the run up to the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, declaring that five prominent Indian female politicians, including Mamata Banerjee and Jayalalithaa, "direly" required a makeover.[4]
Discouragingly, even though the 2019 Lok Sabha elections saw a record number of women elected to the lower house of parliament (78), Indian media outlets were still awash with articles "rating" and commenting on female politician's appearances. One particularly egregious example from reckontalk.com, entitled "Top 16 India’s Glamourous, Young & Cute Politicians: Beauty with Brain," noted that there are now "some well-educated and multi-talented female politicians" who "add a new glamour quotient to politics." It is important to understand that the disproportionate obsession with the appearance and clothing attire of prominent female politicians is a subtle but constant reminder that female politicians are subjected to a different standard to their male counterparts, whose appearances are rarely if ever commented upon.
In the Indian context in particular, politicians and media outlets have regularly weaponised female politicians' appearances to invalidate or belittle their achievements and voices. This is perhaps most noticeable with female politicians from intersectional backgrounds, as exemplified by the attacks that were frequently made on the former leader of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Mayawati (a politician who ran on a platform pledging to improve the lives of those from lower castes). Mayawati's appearance was frequently the subject of such attacks—in 2014 BJP spokesperson Shaina NC remarked that it was unclear whether Mayawati was a "he" or a "she,"[5] while Dayashankar Singh likened her to a "prostitute."[6] As recently as January 2019, a BJP member of the Uttar Pradesh legislative assembly, Sadhana Singh, commented that it was unclear whether Mayawati "is a woman . . . [as she] doesn't understand the concept of dignity."[7] These comments are clearly based upon entrenched stereotypes of what constitutes "femininity," but are also subtly motivated by existing prejudices against women from lower caste backgrounds that seek to associate them with sex work.
Conclusion
In view of the above, it is clear that the findings of the Amnesty report are not isolated instances of an increasingly toxic environment created by the rise of partisan politics. Instead, the rampant sexist and misogynistic abuse that women in positions of prominence within India (political or otherwise) face is a symptom of overlapping narratives that collectively disempower women in the public arena, either by narrowly defining their roles or by weaponising their appearances to critique them.
Article tags: | intersectionality | beauty myth | feminism |
The Amnesty report found that Indian female politicians are subject to almost twice as much online abuse as their counterparts in the UK or the USA. Image source: Amnesty International India
It is the author’s opinion that the rampant sexist and misogynistic abuse that women in positions of prominence within India (political or otherwise) face is a symptom of overlapping narratives that collectively disempower women in the public arena. Image source: Reuters
The author observes a trend within the language used to describe and promote female politicians in India, which confines successful female politicians to familial roles, such as that of a sister, daughter, or mother. For example, the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Jayalalithaa, was nicknamed Amma (mother). Image source: Madras Courier
The weaponising of female politicians’ appearances can be observed in the attacks that were frequently made on the former leader of the BSP, Mayawati. Image Source: Getty Images
Search by Tag
-
While it may be unbeknownst to some, references to Greta Thunberg's U.N. Climate Action Summit address as a "meltdo… https://t.co/5kEEFQELep
Related articles
Sources Cited
[1] Eliza Mackintosh and Swati Gupta, ‘Troll armies, “deepfake” porn videos and violent threats. How Twitter became so toxic for India’s women politicians’ (CNN, 23 January 2020) <https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/22/india/india-women-politicians-trolling-amnesty-asequals-intl/index.html> accessed 25 January 2020.
[2] Mohammed C., ‘Demystifying the “Pro-Female” Rhetoric of the Modi Government’ (And She Wore White, 5 November 2019) <https://www.andsheworewhite.com/article/demystifying-pro-female-rhetoric-modi-government> accessed 24 January 2020.
[3] Anand Mishra and Manoj CG, ‘Vinay Katiyar remarks on looks anger Priyanka Vadra, BJP says not party view’ (Financial Express, 26 January 2017) <https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/vinay-katiyar-remarks-on-looks-anger-priyanka-vadra-bjp-says-not-party-view/522534/> accessed 25 January 2020.
[4] Ashwaq Masoodi, ‘Why women politicians are judged by their looks and not competence’ (livemint, 26 January 2017) <https://www.livemint.com/Politics/AeRoc16S1daqlfDkFk12VO/Why-women-politicians-are-judged-by-their-looks-and-not-comp.html> accessed 24 January 2020.
[5] Ruchi Kumar, ‘India’s ruling BJP under fire over insults to rival party leader Mayawati’ (The National, 20 January 2019) <https://www.thenational.ae/world/asia/india-s-ruling-bjp-under-fire-over-insults-to-rival-party-leader-mayawati-1.815793> accessed 24 January 2020.
[6] Sumit Chakraborty, ‘Mayawati abused by BJP UP leader Dayashankar Singh; called “worse than a prostitute”’ (Financial Express, 20 July 2016) <https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/mayawati-abused-bjp-leader-dayashankar-singh-called-worse-prostitute/323194/> accessed 24 January 2020.
[7] ANI, ‘Mayawati is neither a woman nor a man: BJP MLA Sadhana Singh’ (Yahoo! News, 19 January 2019) <https://in.news.yahoo.com/mayawati-neither-woman-nor-man-bjp-mla-sadhana-180127785.html> accessed 24 January 2020.