Introduction to No women No History
These notes on ‘History of Indian Women in Movements’ deal mainly with the movements in the 19th and 20th centuries and include the contemporary movements. When we say movements, we mean only those movements which helped the society to move forward. We should be clear about this especially since there are many retrogressive, religious chauvinistic movements in our country. Though the movements mentioned in these notes have their own limitations, they were definitely a step forward for women. They helped to unshackle many feudal chains cruelly binding Indian women for centuries. They are a part of the democratic awakening of the people of India. They show that any amount of preaching or debating will not emancipate women and that direct action is the key element. They prove that only the praxis of class struggle can change the oppressive relations in this exploitative society.
We have included general movements as well as women’s movements to understand the role of women in changing society and their conditions. Women do not have an identity just as women. In fact they belong to various classes and sections. So when we talk of oppression and exploitation of women, it does not mean just the oppression they face as women but also as peasants, workers, artisans and as citizens. So we thought it would be appropriate to include general as well as women’s movements in these notes. In fact, there have been struggles on women’s issues (or patriarchy) as part of the general movements and many a time general issues were taken up by the women’s movements. It is a dialectical relationship and women’s emancipation is not possible without fight against all these kinds of oppressions and exploitation. Therefore, it is appropriate to write about both these kinds of movements when we want to record the history of women’s struggle for change.
But people’s history is invisible, and especially women’s history as part of people’s history is doubly invisible due to feudal/ bourgeois method of history writing. Feminists’ contribution in retrieving this history has to be acknowledged in spite of their limitation in seeing it only from a feminist perspective. Yet, most of them, except perhaps StreeSakthiSanghatana‘s book on women’s participation in Telangana struggle, ignore the leftist women’s movements to a large extent or even totally.
The left/revisionists must bear responsibility for not recording the role of women in their movements properly, which to some extent is an outcome of their not recognizing the role of women in movements. The leftist women wrote only about their participation in leftist movements or in general movements prior to 1947 which did not give a comprehensive picture of the role women played in modern Indian history. There has been no effort from their side to put the role of women in perspective, i.e. analyzing the past to advance the present or to understand it as part of the social upheavals of their time.
The information we could get about women’s movements of the North-East or the participation of women in the nationality movements is very limited though all of this is recent history. We hope to include more on their heroic role and sacrifices as we get more information.
Almost no effort had been put in by any of the history writers to record the role of women in contemporary Naxalite movements, which have built up women’s movements over a large area in Southern, Central and Eastern India. Even the parties leading these movements have not come up with a comprehensive history of these movements except for some papers in seminars and articles in magazines. Once the vital role of women in the movements was recognized, more effort was put into recording it. It is commendable that the revolutionary women’s organizations are running women’s bulletins and magazines which record the role of women on a regular basis. These magazines do not only carry reports of struggles, but they also discuss various problems women face and their solutions. The kind of problems taken up for discussion and the solutions offered provide a picture about the objectives of the women’s movements and that of the revolutionary movements of which they are a part.
On the whole, there is scarcity of material on the topic and where available, it is unevenly distributed across regions and time periods.
Since women’s studies departments have come up in a big way in the last three decades, many projects have been taken up by various organizations and universities to conduct in-depth research on certain issues and on the lives of some remarkable women who were pioneers. At a certain level, the information from these projects helps us in getting a fragmented picture or in discovering very high level insights but it fails to give us a totality of view. While giving the minutest details of particular issues, they miss the forest for the trees. Some of the studies are very academic and fail to reach the ordinary reader interested in the history of women’s movements in modern India.
The dominance of elite perspectives is best demonstrated by the efforts of most historians to link middle class women’s participation in the struggles primarily with women’s education or the social reform movement ignoring the large number of women from the peasantry and the working class, including prostitutes, who took part in various struggles directly; and the thousands of housewives – mostly mothers and wives – who provided indirect support to the freedom movement by shouldering family responsibilities when their men went to jail or got killed.
Our general text books or academic history books (most of them, if not all) display a gender bias. It is no surprise if most of us heard or learnt of many women leaders only after we developed an interest in women’s movement and read some more books. Their histories are not part of our commom memory as we are just not taught about them anywhere. The academic books also display a class bias. So when it comes to recording the role of women in India’s freedom struggle, only the contribution of upper class/upper caste women and that of the Congress leaders is recorded but the role of ordinary Dalit/peasant/ working class women, their display of courage in the face of police repression, the social stigma they faced and the sheer effort they had to put in to cope with the double burden of running their households and participating in the movements doesn’t find much mention. It is our task to illuminate all the dark corners of history and present the true picture of these women.
There were many other mass stirrings, some of which even erupted into rebellions against British rule and its socio economic consequences, but these rebellions lacked the recording and publicizing capacity of the literati i.e., the highly literate new middle class who were pioneers as well as products and beneficiaries of the social order. The role of women in the peasant rebellions before the Communist Party of India was formed has not been recorded even in this current work, which is a big lacuna. We will add information as and when we get it. We request readers to send us any information regarding this topic if available.
Since the beginning of the 19th century, the British earned the ire of the Adivasis for their anti- tribal policies which aimed to evict them from their natural dwellings and snatch their traditional means of living. So there have been many tribal revolts against them. Invariably, all of them were armed revolts, and witnessed a large participation from women. The role of tribal women in all these revolts has not been recorded or properly researched into. The story of Rani Gaidinliu is an exception because she at least figures in some books by scholars.
As with all other movements, with regards to the social reform movements too, we find very little information about the women social reformers but since there has been documentation of some sort of their activities, it has been possible to get information about the role played by them. The social reform period coincided with the time when women also started writing. So their written experiences provide valuable insights into their work and times.
When writing about women’s participation in movements before 1947, the role of Dalit women in anti caste movements led by Ambedkar had been ignored by most of the history writers. This gap continues to even this day with regard to the role of Dalit women in movements, post 1947. To assess their role, we must look at the anti caste movements during the colonial period. UrmilaPawar and MeenakshiMoon have written a book about women’s role in Ambedkar’s movements which is the best recorded source on the subject till now. Since it is in Marathi, we could not make use of the material in that book but if we could, it would have greatly enriched this chapter.
Some of the highly placed minority women (Muslim and Christian) find a mention to a certain extent in some of the books but not much is written about the role of ordinary women. The role of Muslim women is recorded only till their split from AIWC (All India Women’s Conference) and the formation of Muslim League. The role of some foreign Christian women had been crucial in the early years of the freedom struggle and also in the formation of separate organizations for women in India.
There is some literature regarding the women in National Revolutionary movement but it is not easily available. Most of it is out of print or out of reach. Some of it is in Bengali. But since their struggle was mainly against the British and it was recorded to some extent, we could provide information about it in these notes. Since these women adopted armed actions as their tactic, most of our textbooks don’t give them any prominence – indeed most of them hardly mention them. Bhagat Singh could not be ignored due to the place he earned in people’s heart with his martyrdom and vision, so he is grudgingly mentioned. But the women revolutionaries are conveniently ignored.
The role of Dalit, peasant, minority and tribal women in the Communist led armed struggles has been documented to some extent by communist women and left leaning men. Information on some legendary women trade union leaders is available to some extent. But the role of women workers in trade union struggles is not recorded in detail anywhere except in some articles here and there. In the books written on the history of workers struggles by leftists/ revisionists, we don’t find any mention of struggles by women workers. Their plight in some of the factories is mentioned in some chapters with no attention paid to their role in struggles. In fact, many women leaders emerged from these movements.
The Autonomous women’s movement (AWM) is composed of innumerable small groups which have been taking up local women’s issues apart from some major campaigns or agitations of national scale in various parts of the country since 1980. The innumerable reports of these activities are scattered over a large number of magazines or seminar papers. A few books have also been written by them. There is no problem of documentation in this because the women who are a part of this movement are not only educated but also aware of the need to record. In fact, the documentation is so meticulous that sometimes even smaller movements got recorded and became available to researchers or gained popularity in academic circles whereas some movements of a larger scale do not get recognition since they are not documented. As it is not possible to enlist all the various campaigns (or agitations) here, only a few are mentioned.
It took a lot of time and effort to gather information for these notes. This is an attempt to bring all the information together for the first time. It is in no way complete but just a humble beginning. We would like to enrich these notes with inputs from the readers in future. Suggestions are also invited to make any additions or changes in the contents.
Women’s struggle against the patriarchal views of the male members and leaders, is a common feature in all the general movements. It may be more intense in some, and less so in others. Sometimes it may lack a comprehensive view; sometimes it may be theoretically better addressed. Whatever be the scale or intensity or the clarity of this struggle, it is inevitable. Unless women fight patriarchy in the society, they will not be able to take part in the movements. So their fight starts there as they inevitably face patriarchal oppression in some form or the other in performing any tasks taken up by them and they cannot advance without fighting it. Since women’s movements arose to fight patriarchy, it goes without saying that their main target is that. So all in all, we cannot separate the struggle against patriarchy from the history of women’s movements.
Be it the nationalist revolutionaries or the communist women, they had to fight hard to become active participants in armed actions. With whom? With their leaders, mentors and comrades. Though they were naturally accepted as companions in the struggle, leading roles or positions were not easy to come by. The resistance from their male comrades had ranged from paternalism to patriarchal views on women’s inferior position. It goes to the credit of women that not only did they fight these views at an ideological level but also proved themselves capable in tasks deemed to be impossible for women. Pritilata’s dying statement in fact reveals the agony she had gone through to prove that women were as capable of sacrifices as men for the freedom of the country. The testimonies of the women who participated in the Telangana struggle give best evidence of the kind of problems they faced and the struggle they had to put up against the patriarchal views of their male comrades.
The women in Congress too struggled to a certain extent against the patriarchal views of their male colleagues and leaders. Especially, leaders like Mridula Sarabhai took up cudgels against such attitudes and were vocal in condemning them. This has to be seen as the rise of bourgeois women for equal rights in the bourgeois setup. Women won their right to be part of Salt Satyagraha by arguing with Gandhi who did not select a single woman for this task. Even during Quit India movement, women defied his dictates and went underground to lead the sabotage activities. Actually the framework of Gandhism itself doesn’t allow for criticism of patriarchy. So such instances of women defying their leaders in Congress are very few. In contrast, the very ideology of Marxism and armed struggle allowed ordinary peasant women to unshackle their chains and question the patriarchal attitudes of even their leaders.
The masses of women who participated in the communist led movements before 1950, true to their class nature aspired for an armed overthrow of the oppressors, be they the landlords or the British. In fact one is awed by the rigour and enthusiasm and above all the initiative they have displayed to start as well as carry on the armed struggle. This characteristic of the toiling women is to be seen in all the revolts of that time- Tebhaga, Telangana, Warli etc. They were not only part of the armed struggle but were ready to lead it. As we dwell into history, we will be amazed at the desire for armed struggle or at least armed retaliation to the oppressors, be they the British or the local land lords, expressed by women in various ways right from 1857 to the present day. This is in total contradiction to Gandhi’s premise that women are more suited to a non-violent form of struggle. The fact is there were innumerable women freedom fighters who despised the Ahimsa path of Gandhi and embraced armed actions. Many of them died anonymously, unsung, unpraised for their role in terrorizing the British. Women realized that armed struggle was a must for their liberation. That’s why when the leadership of the Communist Party of India decided to withdraw armed struggle and became part of parliamentary politics, women in the Party vehemently opposed it. They, more than anybody else, would be losing all that they had won. For women it had been a fight not only against the economic exploitation but also against the patriarchal oppression. The withdrawal of armed struggle was a big blow not only to the democratic revolution but also to the struggle for women’s liberation.
Generally, women’s history is not integrated into the general history. This is a mistake often committed by left/revisionist parties too. So we are still groping in the dark to evaluate the actual historical role of women. If women had been given their due share in history, then a separate or detailed study would have been necessary just to gather details. Since that has not been done, we had to write these notes to evaluate their role as well as to know the details of their contribution. At the end of writing these notes, an inevitable question arose in our minds – what should be the norm for such writing? Should we write women’s history separately? Actually, we should strive to write women’s history as part and parcel of general histories. Only when a detailed study about a specific topic is needed, it can be and should be written separately – for e.g. students’ role or women’s role in movements. Separate studies on women’s role are definitely necessary but if the other side of it is ignored, that is, if it is not integrated into general history the purpose is only half served.
When we see history as a history of class struggles, it goes without saying that women had been part of all class struggles since the slave rebellions. But when we look for names of women who had emerged as leaders out of these movements, they are too few. Women leaders are considered as rare specimens and not ‘natural’ leaders, unlike men. In the 18th century, the social upheavals caused by industrial revolution and the eventual overthrow of the feudal class by the bourgeois led to great changes in the lives of women too. The rise of the bourgeois and the working classes and these social and political upheavals gave birth to the bourgeoisie led women’s movements and the working class women’s movements. The development of capitalism in Europe and the USA and the consequent changes in the family created material conditions and intensified the contradictions within which the women’s movement for equal rights emerged. The movement for women’s emancipation, a movement of and for women has emerged after the growth of capitalism. The past two centuries of the women’s movement have been closely linked and are part of the broader economic and political struggles, of the masses. From then on we see an upsurge in the participation of women in all movements as never before and consequently a rise in the number of women leaders.
In the 19th and 20th century, in US and Europe, women’s struggle for equal rights grew alongside the trade union and socialist movement. The victory of the Russian revolution and the rights granted to women there had a tremendous impact on the women’s movement. In the colonial countries the women’s movement grew within the wide anti-imperialist upsurge and the struggle against feudal oppression. The most successful of them even in the matter of women’s liberation was the Chinese Revolution.
While the bourgeois women’s movement (First Wave & Second Wave Feminisms as they are called) had serious limitations in changing the society, even the revolutionary movements had some problems in identifying patriarchy and putting up a consistent fight against it. But when we look at both these experiences we see that better and radical changes have been achieved on a large scale with the active participation of a larger mass of women in the revolutionary movements and as a continuation of it in socialist countries. Whereas, even though the feminist movement can be credited with bringing the various facets of patriarchy to the attention of the world, in concrete terms, the changes brought about it were limited for the simple reason that power is in the hands of the feudal and bourgeois classes in most of the countries.
Even in India, we find that women’s participation in class struggles and anti-imperialist struggles brought about more changes in society and women’s position whereas struggles by women over just women’s issues did not effect much change in society and women’s position even though they definitely helped to make people recognize the women’s cause. This is because power continues to rest in the hands of feudal, comprador ruling classes which are highly patriarchal too.
So the question of power is very important for women’s emancipation. Unless power comes into the hands of the oppressed and the exploited, women’s liberation is out of question. The brief periods in the communist led peasant movements when power came into the hands of the people gave a taste of the new society where the exploited ruled and here exploited included women. From these, we get an idea of how much power women enjoyed, how power comes into the hands of the exploited women, how much more fight and what additional steps are needed to include women’s agenda in the movement and what more steps are needed to bring them closer to liberation.
We are also confronted with the question of leadership of women as we go through these notes. The vast gallery of women leaders in all these movements has proved one thing beyond question – that women are very capable leaders and sometimes fare even better than men. But at the same time we are acutely aware of the small ratio of leaders to the total number of women participating in the movements. This is a result of centuries of oppression of women. Though the fight against it may not take centuries, it sure is a long drawn battle. Tactics to speed up this process are needed. However revolutionary a movement may be, however great may be the changes in society due to it, unless women also become leaders in bringing about this change, the changes in women’s lives will not be radical or permanent. ‘Participation’ of women is no longer ‘the’ important thing though it has its own importance and implications. How much the women are able to control or decide the process of change i.e., how much they are really empowered has become ‘the’ key question. We hope that a study of these notes will also help us in grappling with the questions of leadership and empowerment of women.
As we wade through this history, it becomes increasingly clear that women cannot achieve emancipation by participating or taking up only a struggle against patriarchy or only a struggle against the economic system. The struggle to change the economic system includes the fight against patriarchy and superstructure. The women’s movement against patriarchy should be an integral part of the revolutionary movement. All forms of social, cultural and economic exploitation and oppression should be addressed by the revolutionary movement.
This means that unless women put up fight against patriarchy in the general revolutionary movement, they cannot go ahead and claim their rightful place in history. And unless women become part of the revolutionary movement in general and see the anti patriarchal struggle as part of it, their emancipation is impossible. Wherever these two fights are separated we find the movements becoming narrow and reaching a dead end.
These notes will also help us to understand the theoretical and practical problems faced by the women. We can learn from their successes and failures. Success can be replicated and failures can be studied and overcome. So studying these notes is not just to learn history but also to help us in praxis i.e., in formulating correct tactics for the women’s movement. We request the readers to go through the notes with this purpose also in mind.
A perusal of the history of these movements once again establishes the fact that armed revolution i.e., New Democratic Revolution alone will be able to pave the way for the emancipation of women. This history of ordinary women is a tribute to the burning desire in their hearts to win their liberation through armed overthrow of the exploiters.
