Vigilante Justice
I’ve just read this article about a gang of pink sari-wearing women in India’s northern Uttar Pradesh state’s Banda area who have taken matters of justice into their own hands. Several hundred women belong to this “gulabi gang” (pink gang), which is “striking fear in the hearts of wrongdoers and earning the grudging respect of officials.”
They wear pink saris, the traditional Indian dress for women, go after corrupt officials and boorish men, and brandish sticks and axes when the push comes to shove.
Two years after they gave themselves a name and an attire, the pink women have thrashed men who have abandoned or beaten their wives and unearthed corruption in the distribution of food grains for the poor.
The founder and leader of the gang, Sampat Pal Devi, is quick to remind us that the women of the pink gang “are not a gang in the usual sense. We are a gang for justice.”
I find this fascinating. I wonder what kind of capacity a gang like this has for corruption. Can vigilante justice work in this way for very long? Or at all? What do you think?
Interesting. I’m not normally a fan of vigilante justice, but when the pwer structure is inherently corrupt the options are…well…limited, to say the least.
In answer to your questions, I have no idea.
Comment by The Wiz — November 26, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Which ones are the rebels, sir? The ones in the pink. Get ‘em.
Reform has to start somewhere, and its best started from within. This method is at least drawing some attention to the problem.
Comment by Janell the Great — November 26, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Kick butt, ladies!
Comment by Jacob M — November 26, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
Sounds like the gangs in Islamic countries who enforce dress codes by beating women — all in the name of righteousness, doncha know.
Gang violence is somehow okay because the bangers are wearing pink?
Why is this even a question?
Comment by LL — November 26, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
i am PRO vigilante justice.
Comment by Jeanne — November 26, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
This is an interesting idea, and I support it. Although I do think it works better in underdeveloped countries more then devloped countries.
Comment by Becky — November 26, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
I believe in peace. Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jesus. I don’t know if a person can call on the help of God by using violence. I’m all for exposing corruption and rescuing women, but I wonder at the methods these women use. Violence changes people’s hearts. What starts out as righteous indignation and quickly become evil.
Comment by camay — November 26, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
The help of God through violence isn’t uncommon; seize the area, chase out those not of God’s people, and destroy their wealth and livelihood is pretty standard, biblical practice. (Yes, yes, I know that the “gulabi gang” are not Christen.) The distinction is commanded and authorized “cleansing” of corruption vs self-authorized.
It’s somewhat amusing to pink associated with something other than Western baby girls.
Comment by Janell the Great — November 26, 2007 @ 7:51 pm
I completely recognize I should oppose this. However, I cannot make myself. I love that they are doing this. They are protecting those who need to be protected-in a way they need to be protected.
Comment by Tanya Sue — November 26, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
I am against violence in all forms. It’s wonderful to see a group of women standing up for the oppressed. However, I would like to see this done in a way that is not violent.
Women, though still oppressed in many areas, can often be creative in their protest. Witness the “panty protest” in Burma.
I urge all of you to oppose violence, no matter how picturesque or seemingly justified.
Comment by BiV — November 26, 2007 @ 9:43 pm
I know we are taught to submit and wait and hope that someone will listen or someone will notice that something really bad is going on, but at some point you have to stop and say NO loudly enough that the whole world hears it.
The women in the article are fighting corruption and injustice–and doing it in a fairly even-handed way. The law will not protect them so they have to protect themselves. And that’s what I see this sort of action as–self defense. I think anyone here would feel justified reacting violently if education (and any other basic right you can think of) was withheld (based on your gender), you were bartered like an animal, you were forced to marry, you lived in a system that is determined to keep you poor.
Comment by AYW — November 27, 2007 @ 4:46 am
There comes a point when people MUST rise up.
If enough of your freedoms are being taken away when
do YOU draw a line in the sand and stand your ground?
BIV, do you think that Holocaust victims would have
been justified in fighting back against the nazis?
Many later in regret stated that they wished they
would have met them with axes and pokers at their
doorsteps.
Not everything can be solved by peaceful protesting
truuuust me.
” You only have the rights you are willing to fight
and die for “
Comment by Jeanne — November 27, 2007 @ 8:19 am
power to the gulabi gang, nice!! people shouldnt have any segregation i think the females the dominant of the species!
Comment by BiV's son — November 27, 2007 @ 10:11 am
When women in Scotland wanted the right to vote the rioted. poured acid into pillar boxes, chained themselves to railings, smashed windows and slashed portraits of the King. They also set fire to important buildings such as Leuchars Railway Station, Ayr Racecourse and the Whitekirk in East Lothian.
Comment by Chrissy — November 27, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jesus. I don’t know if a person can call on the help of God by using violence.
You might want to rethink Jesus.
Comment by Jacob M — November 27, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
I spent some time volunteering at an NGO in Rajasthan (India) where one of the goals was to set up women’s groups to help create solidarity and find solutions to the problems women face in a rural, poor, extremely patriarchal society (women can’t go to school, little choice in marriage, little economic power, etc.).
The women themselves formed a force like the Gulabi gang to expose and punish/shame corrupt officials, abusive husbands, rapists, etc.–the most that their “violence” amounted to was beating the culprits with their slippers or leading them through the village on a donkey to be jeered at. I suppose slippers can be violent and of course shame and humiliation can be used as tools of emotional or psychological violence, but the point was to turn the power of communal disapproval (a very significant force in their society) against the men in question so that their behavior would change. This alternate tactic has developed as a response to the failure of the court system, which mostly lets perpetrators gte off with a warning or a fine and which has no result other than to cause the husband to beat/rape his wife more because she made him lose money.
The result of the new tactics of slipper beating and public shamings, though? Many men have cleaned up their acts because they didn’t want to be humiliated in front of other men in their community.
Sounds like some creative non-violent protest to me.
Comment by Leah — November 28, 2007 @ 10:51 am
[…] night before going to bed, planning to blog about it today, only to find that basically everyone else has blogged about it first…wev…i was still […]
Pingback by 16 days blogging « random babble… — February 2, 2008 @ 4:45 am
I for one applaud what they’re doing. Enough is enough; there is no choice for these women but to rise against injustice. They’ve been pushed into a corner and now they bite back. Good for them.
Comment by Charles — January 27, 2009 @ 5:39 pm
Hello all,
I wondered the same thing. I actually have a facebook page for this group called the Gulabi Gang (there are two others, one french and another English called the Gulabi Gang, the pink sari’s. For those who argue nonviolent ways to fight, these women have suffered beatings, rape, corrupt police, theft, lack of food and other resources. These women also defend men in some instances (when they don’t get fair pay or get their land stolen etc). Nonviolence works but takes extreme time and eventual government influence. The government isn’t helping these people (besides things like making it illegal to abuse someone for being a “lower caste”. If the gov’t and police arrested those breaking the law, these women wouldn’t have to do what they do. These women decided to take a grassroots approach to womens empowerment and justice. They have been applauded by the French, who opened up an office in Paris on their behalf. I also appreciate their situation and response, it’s a big deal and that’s why I am now beginning a support group for them in the US. They don’t immediately beat people. For example, if a husband beats his wife, the wife will tell the Gulabi Gang. A group of women will show up at the house and reason with the husband and explain why he’s wrong and why he should stop beating his wife. If they guy says, ah I see I’ll stop then the women say good. If the guy says nope my wife, my property I’ll keep beating her until she’s dead…well what do you expect? The police won’t do anything, the wives can’t do anything alone, the Gulabi Gang can’t stay their over night, you can’t remove these people from their homes (that would be a break down of homelife and wouldn’t teach these ppl anything). Their response is appropriate to the situation and justified. It’s immediate punishment for the crime committed. It’s more about embarassing and making this kind of abusive behavior shameful for men so that they don’t do it or so that corrupt police actually follow the law!!! There was time when it was ok to spank your kids for behaving inappropriately. I like to think these women are simply putting wrongs right. To Leah, yes, in India hitting someone with a shoe is an extreme insult. If you want to threaten someone you say “thuja jewtha kana hay kya?” Which litteraly means “What, do you want to eat my shoes”…which basically means you’re about to get a royal beat down
Throwing your shoe at someone is an insult…did you see Bush’s duck and cover incident with the Middle Eastern news reporter?
Comment by Payal Razdan — March 20, 2009 @ 4:39 pm