Red, yellow or neutral, women in Thailand's colour-coded politics must have similarly felt their blood boiling at the sexist attack on Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.
That was what I thought when I read the hateful, below-the-belt attack on our embattled premier by an anti-Thaksin businessman, Akeyuth Anchanbutr.
This is what he wrote on his Facebook account, which has stirred much controversy in the social media world:
"I don't want to say things like this, because it will seem like I look down on women. But the fact is, the northern girls who are uneducated, lazy or lacking in intelligence, they will seek to do an easy job that normal women will not do. Mainly it is sexual services.
"Therefore, for the northern woman who is short in intelligence, extremely stupid, yet still thick-faced enough to take up the position, you should know what profession suits you best."
I was stunned. Who wouldn't?
It is no secret that Mr Akeyuth of the notorious Charter Investment pyramid scheme in the 80s is a fierce critic of Thaksin Shinawatra.
It is also public knowledge why Ms Yingluck, born and bred in Chiang Mai, won her premiership.
Despite having a big team of babysitters handpicked by her fugitive brother, her inability even to read a scripted speech correctly had made her a laughing stock. Her management of the current flood disaster is simply disastrous.
Criticise her poor performance if you will. That is what democracy is about. But what came from Mr Akeyuth is not criticism. It is misogyny.
It is ethnic prejudice. It is arrogance from the city centre against other regions. It is ugly chauvinism that must not be tolerated.
You don't need to be a fan of PM Yingluck to feel indignant. You only need to believe that gender and ethnic prejudice is wrong.
You only need to believe in human dignity and understand how patriarchy works to legitimise men's sexual promiscuity by blaming poor women who have been forced into prostitution by systematic injustice as "bad" women, not the men's own lust.
That is why I thought Mr Akeyuth's hate speech would be a good chance to unite women of all political colours to condemn it.
How wrong I was.
It turns out that only northern women groups in the red camp are now airing their fury and calling for a public apology. They have also threatened a lawsuit against Mr Akeyuth for defamation.
It is understandable. The abuse is a direct offence to northern women.
As community leaders in the red zones with possible political links to the Pheu Thai government, they might be even expected to do something to protect Ms Yingluck.
But the silence from other women's rights groups is simply deafening.
Why is this so?
Is it because they currently have their hands full with flood relief work? Is it because they are flood victims themselves and have no time to engage in a war of words?
Is it because they believe the best response to this kind of extremism is to deny the attention it evidently seeks?
Whatever it is, silence is the wrong move because advocacy is an important part of social activism for change.
Women's rights groups may frown at PM Yingluck for her total lack of gender rights awareness and her government's tendency to use women's funds to serve its political constituencies.
But this is not the time to keep a distance. If so, they will face criticism that they are allowing political views to prevail over human rights principles.
Mr Akeyuth's hate speech reflects the patriarchal society's deep prejudice that is the root cause of the oppression of women and the weaker regions. The result is widespread gender violence and ethnic uprising in the restive South.
We must not choose silence because silence is submission.
When the ugly noise of chauvinism strikes, it must be countered with the voice of reason to dismantle prejudice. If we dismiss the voice of hate as insignificant, we are letting our society sink deeper in a big mess, flood or no flood.
No comments:
Post a Comment