By
Pablo Friedmann
Excellent films end with the viewer asking more questions than the film itself answers. Born into Brothels is no exception. The documentary touches on a multitude of complex topics: the role of religion and the caste system, dense urban living pattern, discrimination against certain social sectors, HIV/AIDS transmission in at-risk communities, and the struggles poor families face in their efforts to keep their children in school. It’s impossible to write about all these issues within the space of a single journal entry. For the sake of clarity and substance, I will stick towards the first issue, the role of the caste system in India.
The issue of religious privilege is raised in subtle ways throughout the documentary. There is the astute observation by one of the young female photographers, who herself comes from a Brahmin family, that a private school might only serve vegetables to its students. This, of course, would be a step back for a child who is regularly accustomed to eating chicken and other sources of protein. Implicit in the child’s questioning is the social positioning of her family and, by consequence, her family’s position in the Hindu hierarchy. Zana, the narrator, acknowledges this reality when she articulates her concern for the nutrition and general well-being of the other children, who by the narrator’s own admission are, by default, not Brahmins.
A variant of the caste system rears its head in the film when the narrator discusses her difficulty in procuring a passport for Avijit. The caste system is an engrained system of discrimination veiled behind religious platitudes. The refusal to issue Avijit a passport because his parents are mere criminals, by virtue of their professional occupation, highlights a deeper issue, the larger discrimination that certain sectors of the Indian community face. The obvious victims are sex workers and less obviously, those suffering from HIV/AIDS. When Zara attempts to enroll the young photographers in a boarding school, the principal demands HIV/AIDS tests as a precondition for acceptance. Implicit in that scene is the idea that individuals suffering HIV/AIDS are contagious and undeserving of a proper education.
Against this backdrop, the recent government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has sought to advance an affirmative action policy targeting the most marginalized sectors of the Indian community, namely the untouchables. Over the last few years, quota systems have been instituted in higher learning and government job vacancies. There is, of course, a glaring omission, the private sector. The rise of the IT sector in India- and, by consequence, the corporate rise of firms such as Infosys and Wipro- has empowered a whole new generation of young college graduates. Yet, such job growth and employment has not been uniformly distributed across society (on a side note, it’s ironic to realize that the ongoing debate concerning black economic empowerment, quota systems in higher education, skilled labor, and ownership of productive capital is not just occurring in South Africa). It’s on the heels of the aforementioned statement that The Economist penned an article entitled “With reservations” that described veiled threats the Indian government was leveling against the private sector to increase employment of dalits and Other Backward Classes (OBCs), segments of society considered to be the lowest rung of Hindu priestly society. The article itself was an articulate and persuasively argued piece that sought to make the case against dalit and OBC affirmative action in India. The report raises some key questions and observations that deserve to be studied more in-depth (perhaps more means-testing is needed to fine tune and target the most socio-economically disadvantaged groups). That being said, I think the Prime Minister’s threats are accomplishing something, from a public policy perspective, because it is forcing the private sector to develop its own programs to train and employ greater numbers of employees from disadvantaged backgrounds. At least in that sense, the Prime Minister’s words are being taken seriously by private companies. A failure to incorporate greater number of disadvantaged Indians in the economic boom that is presently befalling Indian risks alienating a sizeable percentage of the electorate and, by consequence, any future support for liberalization reforms.
I selected this piece not because of its relevance to the film, but also because it touches on a subject that is regularly debated here in South Africa, namely economic empowerment for the most marginalized communities. It also deals with a subject that perfectly fits with this week’s theme of children. At the root of any debate concerning private sector and higher education affirmative action, is a population of young adults who ten years ago were just children.
No comments:
Post a Comment