Conservatism or Hypocrisy?

Vijay Mallya, the man who I consider to be the Indian version of British entrepreneur Richard Branson (of Virgin fame) is making serious efforts to bring India to the forefront. By establishing himself as one of the leading business leaders in the country, he has already made a name for himself by purchasing a fledgling Formula One team (naturally named Force India) and is hoping to further welcome foreign influence into the country. Now while some see this as a natural progression given the fact that the country is now one of the leading homes for outsourced work. It seems that to Mallya, the natural next step is to introduce American and European style cheerleading to the sidelines of India's national pastime... cricket. Recently, Mallya flew in cheerleaders from the Washington Redskins to cheer at his cricket team's (not the national team from my understanding but I guess you can consider it to be like the minor league for Cricket) games.

While I think there's no harm in what he's attempting, I think he's overestimating the amount of foreign influence the country is ready for. While cheerleaders over here don't really dance in purposely lewdly or provocatively. Sure there are those rare occasions but I think the main problem a lot of conservative people have with cheerleaders is the fact that they wear such revealing or minimal amounts of clothing. Now honestly, if you've ever been to a sporting event where cheerleaders are present, they are so small compared to the rest of the action around you that there's not much point in making that big a deal about them. At high school games where the stadiums and arenas are a bit more 'intimate' then I can see the problem people could have with scantily dressed dancers but they are just that; dancers.

But still, like a lot of things in India, there is controversy over this decision. Some of the more conservative parties in India have already started voicing complaints over the fact that the cheerleaders are even there at all. There are protests coming from lawmakers representing the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Mumbai who stated, "This [the pictures] is not something you can allow inside your house, or something you can look at in the presence of your sister or daughter." This statement came from Nitin Gadkari who is the BJP president for the state of Maharashtra. And Maharashtra's capital is Mumbai which is home to the largest movie producing industry in the world, Bollywood. And here is where I see the hypocrisy of the conservatives come shining through.

Last year there was general backlash against Richard Gere and Shilpa Shetty over a kiss the two shared at an AIDS awareness rally. The moral conservatives of the country were up in arms over this supposed 'rape' by a foreigner. At least that's what they were claiming the incident to be akin to. At that time they touted the moral conservative values of the nation and how it was wrong for this incident to take place. Now once again the conservatives of India are calling for a ban of these dancers and demanding that they be appropriately dressed for their performances at the cricket matches. I see and hear all these things and then I wonder where these same people are when Bollywood does the same thing if not even more lewdly if some of today's movies are to be a standard.

Now take a look at this still image from last year's film "Dhoom 2" and tell me if the dance moves or dress is representative of the moral conservative values of the nation. Where are these representatives when their own movie industry flaunts the opposite of the values these groups apparently stand for? They are keeping their mouths shut and their heads low at those times though the same things they are protesting are present in these films as well. I find it to be very hypocritical when these groups jump up and down screaming at one point and then turn a blind eye at the same thing at the next. If you represent a moral conservative majority in your estimation then apply these morals equally across the board.

I think part of the reason for it stems from the mentality that unfortunately a lot of Indians have. Now before you start posting comments criticizing me for speaking out against Indian ideas, be aware that my own cultural heritage is Indian so I do have some experience in this arena. I've acted in plays before and taken on roles where I played a villain. In particular I remembered one instance where I was shown to be a person of questionable character who uses drugs and is violent towards others. I viewed it as an acting challenge because it meant trying to act in a way that made people hate me. Others had rejected the part because they felt they would be associated with those negative stereotypes. I thought that was ridiculous so it was with some surprise that I heard from one of the mother's of one of my co-stars who told me that she was very shocked to realize that I wasn't at all like the character I was portraying in the play. I was actually a decent guy, or in her words, "a nice boy."

I was surprised but as I asked around I realized that lots of Indians made that assumption. When we performed a show in New York, people there who remembered me from previous plays we had performed there came and complimented me on my varied roles. Others who saw me for the first time in that villainous role kept their distance because many of them assumed that that was what I was really like. I dont' know what to call it but it's a negative trait that is very prevalent in a lot of Indians. If we see something or someone doing something that we don't like, we automatically assume it to be bad and then we hide behind our moral conservative roots. If that's the case and that's the true nature of India then kick out all of the people who dress in western attire and embrace the ideas of Gandhi wearing only homespun cloth. And if you choose to follow Gandhi's guidelines to that devout a level, do it because it's the right thing to do and not because you saw it in the latest "Munna Bhai" movie.