Following is a translation of Jaun's article published in Insha magazine dated February 1960. As always Jaun's insights from more than half a century back are so strikingly relevant today, that they leave one in awe of the vision and intellect that the man possessed. Here's what he had to say about the age old institutions of prostitution and marriage.
It would be a huge stretch of the imagination to determine what was the first monetary transaction, that man partook in. It was, perhaps, to attain carnal pleasures from the body of a woman a.k.a. prostitution. Never in the history of mankind, has this market seen a downfall or a depression. In fact prostitution has a logic to it—that the moralists will not accept it is obviously understandable. According to this logic this eternally disgraceful and world famous profession is a bold protest. A gender specific rebellion, against the so called traditions and morals of the society, initiated not by Socrates, Plato or Aristotle; rather it was the invention of their mothers, sisters and daughters, as an answer to the moral appropriation exercised by their men. The first to accept this collective rebellion was a man and the one who out rightly rejected it was also a man. This problem has been ever present with all its intensity since ages, but today its complications have multiplied remarkably.
Every reformist government has time
and again found itself faced with the question, of how to abolish the institution
of prostitution. Our government is also seriously considering this
problem and is committed to resolve it. Our aim here is to clarify some aspects
regarding this issue, which will hopefully facilitate in its resolution.
Moreover we also urge the opinion makers of our time to deliberate over the
matter and try to come up with a solution, which will surely be a remarkable service
to this nation.
The socio-cultural and
economic aspects of this matter are inarguable. A
negative atmosphere, faulty upbringing, unnecessary restrictions, overwhelming
societal pressures, unequal economic conditions are some of the major
contributing factors towards the institutionalization of Prostitution. But to understand this matter in its entirety, we need to
delve into the solitary calignosity of human nature itself.
It won’t be wrong to say that both
men and women are promiscuous by nature. Psychologically speaking there is no
doubt about the fact that their carnal desires cannot be satisfied by a certain
routine or monotony, notwithstanding the fact that practically, women have to be
content with a single husband due to societal boundaries. But if we consider
the number of non prostitute, promiscuous women which by no means is a small
one, then we would have to label the society at large as a prostitution hub.
This line of thought only goes on to increase the importance of this issue
because , to eradicate labeled markets of prostitution is a herculean task in
itself but still possible, but how can a government eradicate all such places
where human society exists?
The innumerable questions that arise
here demand a keen interest and an open mind. Firstly, if humans are sexually
multifarious then why is polygamy looked down upon? Especially when a man can
do justice with his wives, both physically and economically. On the other hand, it is only fair to argue that women should also be allowed to have multiple
husbands. Isn’t this argument as significant as the first one? In fact there
are some economical benefits to it as well. Or else we’d have to prove that
only men are sexually diversified and women are not, but would we be able to
prove this?
Perhaps we should resort to
presenting the matter in its most logical state. Secondly, what is the logical
basis of opposing prostitution? What is the scientific definition of honor?
This discussion is only aimed at instigating a debate to come up with a logical
argument against the institute of prostitution.
In ancient societies sexual
instigation wasn’t as powerful or effective as it is today. Pornography alongside a
more open societal existence has pushed man towards a sexual
crisis. On the other hand the requirements and responsibilities of modern life have
made marriage next to impossible; especially youngsters from the newly formed
Eastern nations are burdened with unusual responsibilities. They are yet to
struggle to come to terms with the educational, cultural and scientific standards of the modern age. Not only are they extremely hyperactive but
are also mentally secluded. In fact in this industrial age man is leading a lonely
life amidst a crowd thanks to his busy schedule.
The individuals in these busy,
unfamiliar, incredulous and noisy times are in a hurry with everything they do.
It is impossible to be stationary, which is why we see a
disconnect from traditional morals. The psychological focus, ideological trust and
temperamental strength required to sustain traditional morals is nowhere to be
found. Despite the apparent transition of the
world into a global village and the integration of societies, personalities
have drifted apart like planets. The institute of the family is facing extinction.
We should ponder over whether our ancient and venerated sexual morality can be
sustained in the present times. Marriage is not the solution anymore; in fact
it is a big part of the problem itself. The number of individuals who can
fulfill the economic burden of marriage without getting entangled in a complex
web of problems is declining with every passing day.
The condemnable and shameful
institute of prostitution should be abolished without a doubt, but will it
solve our societal problems or will it cause a rise in them. Can’t we foresee
that in the near future men and women will be forced into short term contracts
rather than marriage. Anyway we have strived to present the matter in all its
intensity so that we can work towards a solution,
with the same intensity.
P.S: Fi
P.S: Fi
Thirdly, It was interesting for a person like me--who considers Jaun to be the ultimate non-conformist--to observe how even Jaun has employed a very apologetic approach despite thinking out loudly on such a sensitive topic. For instance, the second paragraph is very unlike Jaun in my opinion. Despite having read a lot of his prose, I'm unable to recall an instance where he tried so hard to justify the aims and objectives of his argument.
Finally, To the people who're going to advise me on how I should send my mother and sisters etc. to Heera Mandi. For the umpteenth time, I do not own them, they can go and do whatever they wish to do with their bodies.
