Nastik Nation Desk ~
Rahana Fatima allowed her son to paint her body as an awareness campaign giving it a tagline Body, Art and Politics. She uploaded the video on her YouTube channel that showed her son painting on her nude body, while the activist’s daughter helping her brother who was doing the painting.
The authorities, including the police and children’s affairs department in the State took this for a grave crime and chose to take action legally against Rahna Fathima, on the ground of child sexual abuse and showing nudity publicly.
Some pointed out that such move against her was far from being sensible, since nudity cannot be interlinked with the act of sex every time. To show nudity of parents to their children is one of the ways to teach them that nude body of the opposite sex is a natural outcome, there being nothing to hide for the sake of sexuality grounds. Social expert also ratify this saying an early exposure to male and female nudity will help children grow with balanced sexual views in their later lives. It is good and healthy practice if the parents themselves let their children see them nude. Crimes against women happen because boys in our society take woman for objects to satisfy their bodily pleasures.
In the video her son is paining her chest making the nipples a flower-seed and taking breasts for petals.
Arguments in favour of Rahna are many – a few examples:
A patient lying on the surgery table, she or he maybe there without cloths on.
A nude model standing in front of students of painting at a fine arts college.
The nude sanyasis at the celebrated Kubh Mela.
The Jain spiritual leaders who roam the city naked.
Athletes practising swimming at public swimming pools.
Doing streaking as a form of mass protest.
Last but not least, the newly wedded couple on camera locking their lips, this goes into the wedding albums to be seen by all including children in the respective families.
Harish Vasudev, a legal luminary and a prominent writer and columnist in Kerala sounded his concerns against the moves of the government departments that had gone with the popular way in criticizing Rahna Fathima. He contended that why they did not take action against those who cut off the foreskin of young boys.
It is worth mentioning that until just a few decades ago women in Kerala didn’t cover their breasts either as part of the culture or the tradition that didn’t permit them to wear a top-piece. Only during the British rule they took to clothes that covered their breasts, even the names for such dresses like blouse and rowka are foreign words, not native ones.
Several woman on social media criticized her including those from medical profession. One lady trolled Rahna about her under-sized breasts saying, “I dont think she has such a thing [breasts]; yes, of course, she has something there, just like men do.”
People supported Rahna said she was a woman who lived ahead of her time. They suggested she was bold enough to reveal the hypocraxxxy of the society.