In 2005 when Mumbai’s Dance
Bars were shut down, I gladly accepted the invitation of bar dancers’
organization to address their rally in Azad Maidan to protest against the ban
imposed by the Government on their profession. My argument was simple; women who
dance in these bars are merely emulating what we see celebrated actresses do in
every second Bollywood film.
If anything most bar dancers
dress far more modestly than Bipasha Basu or Katrina Kaif do while dancing
raunchy numbers like Bidi Jalaiye le or Chikni Chameli.
Their only fault is that most bar dancers come from miserably poor families;
many end up in the profession because they have been abandoned by husbands or
are sole breadwinners supporting disabled or sick parents and younger siblings.
By contrast most film heroines today come from highly educated and wealthy
families.
At that rally, bar dancers
who spoke from the stage openly abused the police for their hypocrisy saying:
“They say we are immoral. But they have no shame coming and raiding the bars in
order to extort money from us. What does that make them? bhadwas?”
Many bar dancers faced
destitution when bars were forcibly shut down. However, that did not mean an
end of their profession. Since it became fashionable to have young women gyrate
to Bollywood numbers on every conceivable occasion--from political rallies to
weddings and even functions organized by the police, many found other venues to
perform.
Though I wasn't in favour of
the ban, I find it hard to celebrate its revocation. It may be a victory for
bar owners but not quite so for women. The stigma attached to the profession
stays despite the fact that dancing per se is no more stigmatized. For example,
women of “respectable” families dance to the same Bollywood tunes in their
family weddings, birthday parties and in discotheques. And yet, many of those
who wax eloquent in favor of dance bars would never let their own daughter or
sister take to this profession.
The stigma is connected to
the fact that many of the dance bars are black holes of economic and sexual
exploitation. For example, most bar owners don't pay any salary to the dancers.
They are expected to earn from tips given by tipsy customers. Those vary from
day to day and from customer to customer putting a pressure on these women to
appear "pleasing" to the men. What is worse, the bar owners are
reported to take away 40 to 50% of the money received by the dancers as tips as
their share for letting them dance in their bars.
Dancing seductively before a
group of drunken louts who frequent these bars is not a very dignified way to
earn a living. Bar dancer turned film script writer Shagufta admitted candidly
on NDTV that while bar dancing saved her from the clutches of flesh trade, it
was hardly an enjoyable or dignified profession. Most women don’t dare disclose
to their families that they are supporting them by dancing in bars because it
is considered just a shade better than prostitution.
It is well known that dance
bar clientele usually includes underworld dons and other shady characters. The
Supreme Court may order tighter regulations to make the working environment
safe for bar dancers, but given the high level of criminalization of our
police, the so called law and order guardians pose a bigger threat for these
women than do ordinary goondas. Police routinely fleece both the bar owners and
dancers.
When talking of the
livelihood rights of bar dancers, we cannot afford to ignore the fact that even
those who may not be hostile to bar dancers per se do not want dance bars in
their neighborhoods, just as even those who consume liquor don’t want a liquor
shop next to their home. The reason is simple: such places invariably attract
lumpen elements who pose a threat to neighborhood safety. Self styled liberals
and feminists use the term “moral policing” as a pejorative. But a society
which gives up its right to exercise moral pressure on individuals to observe
social decorum is a dying society.
Even today in closely knit
villages and stable urban neighborhoods crime rates are low; men dare not
indulge in sexual harassment or drunken brawls in public places because they
face serious social censure. Our cities have become unsafe largely because
people live anonymous lives due to breakdown of community life. Neighborhood
bonds and community controls have become lax or nonexistent. As a result young
people are growing up rudderless and get easily sucked into anti social
activities.
Today, we cannot afford to
brush away with disdain the concerns of those who oppose the existence of dance
bars in their neighborhoods. Thus the right to livelihood of bar dancers is
pitched against citizens’ right to decide what kind of activities they wish to
keep out of their neighborhoods. For example, thanks to the work of Shetkari
Sangathana in Maharashtra the law mandates that the government would have to
close the liquor shop in every such village or municipality where the majority
of women vote against presence of daru ka adda because it
inevitably becomes a magnet for anti-social elements. However, feminists have
celebrated militant anti-liquor movements in rural India, including forcible
closure of liquor shops only when they were led by leftist organizations.
Are we going to deny the
same right with regard to dance bars, simply because demand for their closure
doesn't come under the banner of Maoist or Communist parties?
This article was published in The Indian Express on
20th July 2013 (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/my-neighbourhood-s-right-not-to-have-a-dance-bar/1144138/)
