Why I Believe Salman Khan Doesn’t Owe Anybody an Apology

Share this:

The NCW’s frivolous political correctness is distorting public discourse and distracting attention from serious threats that women in India face.

Salman Khan. Credit: PTI

Salman Khan. Credit: PTI

One can understand feminists targeting Salman Khan for his alleged insult to women with his ‘rape’ analogy. But for the National Commission for Women (NCW) to summon the actor with the threat of suing him is to rob whatever little dignity there is left in this otherwise ineffective and toothless institution.

When is the last time you heard or saw the NCW do something meaningful or memorable for women? Most of its chairpersons have been political appointees and have used the office to emote profusely while doing very little constructive work. It is also a poorly administered institution lacking fine-tuned systems for responding to challenges that women face today. Therefore, all we get from the commission are knee jerk responses to trivial events rather than a well-thought-out vision and programme of action for improving the lot of women.

At a time when we are being confronted with gruesome reports of gang rapes of women and kids, of thousands of children being abducted every year for inhuman forms of trafficking, millions of women being sucked into the flesh trade every year, countless women becoming victims of cybercrimes, the NCW had to pick up the most ridiculous issue to flex its muscles. Its chairperson is acting as though a man uncritically using the word ‘rape’ as an analogy commits a far more heinous crime than actually raping women. Why else is it that we have not seen the NCW issue any threats to actual rapists.

What Salman said

Before I offer my reasons for coming out in defence of Salman Khan, let me refresh the readers’ memory by quoting, from the original source, the exact statement as well as the background of the controversial remarks.  In response to a reporter’s question on what kind of effort he put in to get the character of a wrestler in a soon to be released film physically right, Salman said:

It’s a tough process. You need ample training like the wrestlers. The training Aamir Khan and I have been through is similar or probably a little more than what the wrestlers go through. If we didn’t do it, we wouldn’t be able to fight convincingly in the ring…. I underwent weight training. Then I perfected the moves. I spent 2-3 hours in the day practising those because in the film, I go from the village level akhada to the mat-based ring and then the MMA arena. So I had to do a lot of punching and kicking. I had to be convincing or else I’d look like a fraud.     

The reporter then comments, “The shoot must have been gruelling…” To this Salman responds:

While shooting, during those six hours, there’d be so much of lifting and thrusting on the ground involved. That was tough for me because if I was lifting, I’d have to lift the same 120-kilo guy 10 times for 10 different angles. And likewise, get thrown that many times on the ground. This act is not repeated that many times in the real fights in the ring. When I used to walk out of the ring, after the shoot, I used to feel like a raped woman. I couldn’t walk straight. I would eat and then, head right back to training. That couldn’t stop.

Far from finding these remarks offensive, I was actually moved by them.

Salman did not make a casual, light-hearted comment about rape, nor refer to the crime as an enjoyable sport. He offers his analogy to refer to the kind of physical pain and torture an actor has to go through in order to do those macho roles involving what is light-heartedly referred to as Bollywood style dishum-dishum, which many youngsters think is a lot of fun. But describing the gruesome battering the body takes to prepare for, rehearse and enact those roles for the camera, Salman is in fact de-glamorising the entire exercise. He describes the vulnerabilities of screen heroes in real life and how such situations can even lead to grievous and life threatening injuries, as they did in the case of Amitabh Bachchan on the sets of the blockbuster film Coolie.

If a man who has been put through the grueling experience described by Salman Khan compares it to the physical battering of a raped woman, the analogy is not so inappropriate as to cause a media uproar.

True, rape is far more than physical trauma – it’s also a violation of a woman’s selfhood and dignity – whereas Salman is undergoing that grueling predicament voluntarily, for money, name and fame. But the seriousness of the occupational hazard should not be undermined just as the occupational risks involved in being a pilot flying and dropping provisions to soldiers based in Siachen can’t be lightly dismissed by saying, “Well, he was paid for the job and chose it voluntarily”. Similarly, no one is dismissive of the risks taken by a mountaineer going up Everest by saying he is well paid and chose to climb the treacherous peaks for name and fame.

Analogies in perspective

Moreover, analogies – whether negative or positive – are not meant to be taken literally. For instance, if a male poet compares the beauty of his beloved to the radiance of a full moon, it doesn’t mean the woman has to have a perfectly round, silver blue face which can be taken as a replica of the moon as seen from the earth.  When you say someone eats like a pig, it doesn’t mean that the man actually eats muck.

While Salman used the rape analogy to describe a life-threatening situation during shooting, in fact, the analogy is often used light heartedly to refer to a range of situations, not just by men but also women.  I have heard young female students describe the experience of sitting through the classes of aggressive teachers who act like bullies as “intellectual rape”. Recently, a well-known author talked about the “rape of the rupee”. Environmentalists often use the phrase “rape of Mother Earth” to describe the callous manner in which governments, corporates and other vested interests are plundering and vandalising this planet unmindful of its consequences for future generations.

Alexander Pope’s satirical poem Rape of the Lock is still taught as a literary classic the world over, including in India, even though it uses the term “rape” to poke fun at the foibles, vanities and fantasies of 18th century British women.  Had it been a 21st century Indian male who wrote a similar poem using the term “rape” in a satirical manner, the NCW would have stopped at nothing short of seeking the death penalty for him!  Even with Salman, many feminists have menacingly declared that a “mere apology” won’t do. Who knows, with the majestic women’s commission leading from the front, what punishment they have in mind. Would the NCW dare demand a ban on Alexander Pope’s writings?

Unfortunately, by making a mountain out of a molehill and hyper-ventilating for days on end on prime time television, self-appointed thekedars of women’s rights have made activist women a laughing stock of the nation. Those who cry for frivolous reasons have created conditions for a serious backlash on women’s issues.

The most bizarre part of this entire saga is that most of those who are baying for Salman’s blood go hysterical when it comes to government censorship over pornography or even minor cuts in films like Udta Punjab, which are replete with foul, highly sexist abuses. They don’t want censorship over pornography – which is highly demeaning to female dignity and filled with gross forms of violence on female bodies – but they support “verbal censorship” of the most tyrannical variety in our daily conversation. Any attempt by state institutions to curb vulgarity and violence is rejected as unwanted ‘moral policing’ and a sign of authoritarianism. But TV anchors and sundry feminists think they have a god-given right to impose their moral code and censorship even on casual conversations.

We must say a firm ‘No’ to this fake and frivolous manifestation of political correctness that is distorting public discourse and distracting attention from serious issues.

And my sincere advice to Salman Khan: Please don’t buckle under the illegitimate pressure the NCW is putting on you to apologise publicly for your comments.

Madhu Purnima Kishwar is national professor, ICSSR and founder of the women’s and human rights organisation, MANUSHI

Share this:

  • lyone

    I agree.

  • Aritra Paul

    Surprisingly i agree with the writer above. We have serious issues to deal with and an analogy has been over dissected because the source is a star. Instead of suing Salman Khan for his comments, we need to fix up the system that allows us to analogies violence in our thought process.

  • Sanjay Kulkarni

    I had wrote a comment, edited it twice. But it has disappeared. Neither have I any information about it being under moderation.
    Has it been deleted becuase it was critical? Where is my Freedom of Speech?
    Next time I am going to save the webpage on my PC as evidence. (For this page also lest this comment may also disappear.)

  • Sandy Sekhon

    Finally someone has written truth and sensible on this matter.

  • Shipra Chaudhary


  • Sanjay Kulkarni

    This is ridiculous. There is nothing to be ‘moved’ by the remarks. They are demeaning to Women. Full stop.
    However justified the criticism of NCW may be (and I agree it is), to glorify what at best can be called as a ‘spoiled brat’ with many criminal cases (and suspected links with underworld) is like the medicine being more lethal than the original disease. This is as hypocritical as the demand not to hang Yakub Memon, under the garb of glorified campaign for cancelling capital punishment was.
    The issue is right, but the icon has gone terribly wrong.
    And what are we achieving by glorifying such persons? What good is it going to do the society in the long run?
    NCW may not have the moral authority, but the society definitely deserves an unconditional apology.
    The so called celebrities can’t get away with anything and everything, just because they are celebrities or favorites of the powers that be.
    (I am saving the page with this document as an evidence. If you still remove it I will find contact of the author and send it to her.)

  • Aleya Siddika

    An apology for a self-corrected slip is an absolute no. Does not need further clarification. Being a woman feel ashamed of the role NCW is playing in the drama created by a certain quarter of parasitic media. NCW must be in the news for stopping the heinous act and securing every girl/woman in India. Apart from that as far as the use of the term is concerned, language has evolved and is evolving. The era of prescriptive use of language is a past now. We have liberty to use language to express our thoughts and feelings. We are required to get the intended meaning not just the term for communication. Besides, as human beings we all are subject to slips of pen slips of tongue. Otherwise these phrases would not have their intended meanings into existence. God bless everyone with sanity and clarity in mind.

  • ashok759

    There was a context to the remark which many people have found offensive. The sensible thing would be for the actor to issue a statement, apologising for sensibilities that may have been hurt and saying that was never his intention.

  • Rohini

    I completely agree. The NCW is a toothless organisation that has effectively failed to tackle the real threat that women face everyday. It has also not been in the forefront of support for equal rights for women in terms of a uniform civil code. It avoids the REAL fights and picks on soft targets like Salman Khan..easy prey for quick publicity. Seriosly, as woman,I do not feel the NCW is doing anything to further women’s rights in India.

  • Red Rackham

    Finally someone said it. I’m not a Salman fan, but this was a non-issue if there ever was one.

  • Sarah Asif

    Best article I’ve read in a very long time!

  • Uttam Kumar

    The criticism made against the NCW might have some element of truth, but the timing and circumstances under which criticism is made is highly questionable. The toothless character of NSW should not be used as a pretext to defend the insensitive remark of a popular bollywood performer ( I do not consider Salman Khan as an actor). Secondly, analogy might not be taken literally, but the implication of an analogy must be scrutinized with our social reality. The implication of Salman’s rape analogy could not be seen as empathetic to women in general, and rape victim in particular. The rape analogy clearly reflect Salman’s lack of understanding of a severe crime called “Rape”. His choice of language to express his consensual suffering to earn crores of rupees and buy followers is totally unjustified. There are, off course, many important issues which have to be taken seriously not only by the NCW but by the public at large. But the insensitive use of language and analogy is also an important issue to be taken seriously in the fight for women empowerment. Language is not just a medium of communication but it reflects the power relation built into it. For instance, can we imagine a person (man, woman, LGBT) who has been a rape victim would use such analogy? The use of rape analogy by Salman has certainly twisted the knife in the wound of many rape victims around the world.

  • Liam

    Perhaps you should go around and the same things to the writers who likes to dig on the same issues of Salman and alter each and every of his speech. Desis and their oversensitive nature.

  • Liam

    Fantastic article! This matter was stretched for no reason. Salman haters are waiting at every step for him to utter something and sensationalize it.