Renee das stepped into the office of Ashok Shukla, her boss and Director HR. She gasped on seeing a team of seven lady managers from sales, MR and marketing with him. Renee was VP, HR at Teffer India, a job that had her travel quite a bit, and often she felt she was behind the office grapevine.
“Now, what have I missed?” she said with a half laugh as she entered Shukla’s room. “They will tell you,” said Shukla, as Kosha Shah, a manager in MR began with periodic suggestions, clarifications, interruptions and corrections from the other six managers with her.
“We are often in the midst of men who foul mouth. Sometimes it is part of a dialogue between them, and, unwittingly, colourful words pop out. Sometimes it is a flamboyant expression to define a situation, say, during a presentation, or during a client meeting. Some at least bite their tongue, and apologise; some become aware that women are present, but they will shrug and say, ‘that’s too bad’; some carry on and engage in a free exchange of expletives. We don’t like this.”
Renee: You could tell them not to use bad language in your presence? Or you would like them to apologise? You should tell them to. Or is it the language? Which one is it?”
Kosha (speaking for everyone): No, none of this. We want a work environment here, not a locker room. I feel and my colleagues here feel too: the workplace has to be a workplace, with no overt gender expressions.
Renee: Gender expressions? What do you not like about their abuses?
Tanisha: Let me take that, Kosha. The fact that all abuses are about women — about mother, about daughter, about sister. Even illegitimacy is an expletive to vilify and offend the mother!
Renee: And so? Look, a person who needs the crutch of bad language does not check out his grammar. He spews.
Tanisha: No, he chooses his abuses.
Renee: Or maybe it is a fad?
Tanisha: Abuses are a lifestyle, but it is copied from characters one wishes to emulate. By copying, you are expecting to imbibe the idol’s power. So when I use Lux I want to be like Katrina Kaif... or at least do the things she does. That is what copying is about. When a man uses Axe, he wants the same Axe effect to happen to him. That is why he uses the advertised brand!
Besides, this desire to use expression that belittles or condemns women arises from a deep-rooted disdain for them. Simple.
Damayanti: Oh, hello! Then this must be very Indian; just when the US pulled off Tiger Woods from their ads, an Indian businessman signed TW for a whopping Rs 200 crore and the publicity firm had this to say: Our brand’s association (with Woods) will immediately raise the profile of the brand.
So, the point really is, we do negotiate our ideals and are willing to turn a blind eye to serious flaws in our idols.
But this is expected in India where the world is seen through male eyes. The woman’s viewpoint is a joke. So if international brands dropped Woods for his anti brand image with his numerous affairs and, importantly, the destruction of his marriage — why would India do that? Macho India’s misogynistic behaviour is in the news everyday! Likewise and yet to quell a rising argument in your head: Paula Deen was dropped by several brands when they discovered she had made some racial remarks, even if that was in the very distant past. The moment it came to light, the brands like Smithfield Foods decided to drop her. So, you see, mere association with an unsavory value was enough for the brand to dissociate with her. But seems TW is ok for India. We have always been like that... willing to condone utterly bad behaviour if it is good for profits. Likely even the consumer of such brands do not mind.
Kosha: This is about workplace behaviour, not a gender battle. We have enough women out there who engage in foul mouthing. They say it goes with the territory. I am not getting into that. To each his own, but you tell me, does the HR manual grant it?
A workplace is a workplace. Men cannot emote here, please. This language extends to the distributor, to the cabbie, to casual language; it is regular talk. So I am at the distributor’s office with Avijit, and they are sorting out some collections and the distributor is speaking to one of his people on the phone and the language is all red and purple. And Avijit laughs. This is endorsement. I agree, it can even be an embarrassed laughter, but remaining poker faced was an option.
Damayanti: Renee, they are at least not so badly gone that they abuse us, although that has also happened once and the man was apologising profusely. Like a drunk person, he clearly had no control on his intellect.
Renee: Are you not making too big a thing about this? It is just words. Some like it hot, some like it cold. So, are we making a mountain?
Kosha: No. This IS a serious issue. This sounds like some minister who said, ‘ So what men will be boys, they make mistakes...’
Renee: Ok (grinning), what is the downside of not condoning abusive language? Will control create a better workplace?
Kosha: I am fascinated. I was reading about a list of abuses that are going to be censored from films and everybody is crying foul, calling it absurd, regressive and against creative freedom. Seriously? From all the opportunities available for creative expression, including that old-fashioned one called ‘education,’ it is the right to use cuss words that will help his or her creativity? The right to be wrong is one thing, but demanding that your right is enjoyed by others? That your creative expression is more sacred than the damage to the social fabric — that makes me think.
What are we allowing life to do? Or is that also an old-fashioned rhetoric? Is corruption the new fashionable?
Trishna: Try this: when a man walked past me on Janpath Causeway and whistled into my face, I was poker faced and said in my head, ‘Go slip and fall on poo.’ That was my anger. Internal. I did not ask him to shut up. Why did I not protest openly? I was so angry that I was watching his funeral in my head. But what did that man get? A finding: When you tease a girl — verbally, eye-to-eye, in gestures, physically, emotionally, she has no choice but to endure. I can do it and it is allowed. Isn’t that what Nirbhaya’s killer meant?
Damayanti: Two things are going on here: a) The girl is unsure if she must express her anger either because she has been brought up to not express anger or because she fears her expression may have a backlash; and b) Men know that. They just know that! Which is why, last week when a man whispered right into my face ‘hi sexy’ and I shouted at him, he yelled back so loudly and abused, ‘Who was talking to you, you prostitute!’ He was scaring me and he was reading from a rule book that said since he was referring to some ‘other person’, not me, I cannot object.
Shukla was very disturbed by now. He just could not deal with this. Renee, who had seen enough in her 43 years as a woman, knew all this but had never given it expression. She now knew that this whole irritation with abusive language that was used casually in the workplace was connected to the external world. But Kosha was talking...
Kosha: In our workplace: When you mouth nonsense about any unnamed woman, do I feel respected, Renee? So, the men when they abuse women through their language, are they not the same professionals who sell baby food or skin care or detergents to women? Is there a dissonance or not? Who is this man who strategises an ad copyline that says ‘to the woman who has a right to be cared...’ and also hurls abuses that denigrate women? Is there a confusion of personas?
Just because he is saying it to someone else does not become abuse of women? If I see a man beat up a woman, I am supposed to be unaffected because he is not beating me? Should I work in an organisation where men can abuse my sensibilities?
Shukla: Are men abusing your sensibilities or are you feeling abused? They are abusing one another I see...Why do you feel it is about you?
Damayanti: I will take that, Kosha. How come then when Kusum ben says to her neighbours ‘I prefer this detergent it is so nice on my hands!’, you immediately call for a R&D meeting and say this is how consumers feel about competition, we must make our detergent softer...! Why did you feel it was about Teffer? Those women were not talking to Teffer or you or about your brand, then why did you use that feedback?
Shukla: That was feedback!
Damayanti (raising her voice): This was feedback too!!! When a man in conversation uses a word that he says is used as an endearment, but which demeans women, it is feedback he is giving about how he rates women who are sisters of anybody, mothers of anybody! When seven of our male managers sit in a room and watch the AIB Roast and laugh, what are they enjoying? Form or content? How is it that you do not see this, when we do?
Shukla: I guess that is an area we cannot legislate because it is their freedom to watch what they want. It is their personal preference, if I may say. But yes, if he abuses another, then there is law that penalises.
Kosha: And alongside his right to hear any trash, and his freedom of speech is also the freedom of choice that I have to prefer a certain kind of work environment!
Shukla: Renee, what is freedom of speech?
Renee clicked on her iPad and read out from Wikipedia: Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one’s opinions and ideas. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.
Tanisha: Ok, I am from Legal...! There is something called ‘offence principle’ as well. It concerns the moral standing and feelings of society — I would interpret that as immediate society and not necessarily society at large. So, the offence principle can be applied to increase the scope of freedom of speech to include special interest groups like the disabled, like the gay community, like religious groups,...or any speech that provokes or hurts minority sentiment.
Kosha: So, men in my organisational society using language that offends women, denigrates women, are guilty of breaching the offence principle of the freedom of speech.... How come you Mr. Shukla do not find their words about your mother offensive?
Shukla could see how intense these ladies were. He said to Renee, “Tell me what you think, Renee.
Renee took a deep breath and looked at them all.
Renee: I am so happy that we have women like these in our organisation. I am so glad you have brought this up. This is not just about our organisation, it is about the larger society that we are a part of. I feel if women are grappling with an image issue in the external world today, then we all have a role to play there; we are also a part of the wider national issue of respect for women. I am concerned that this is going on right under our noses but as is mostly the case, we have never felt it was wrong. Why, I myself have looked the other way when my male colleagues have used abusive words, even if it was on the phone to another. This most used abuse, that alludes to aggressive sexual assault — no, I am sorry that is what it really means isn’t it, Ashok? Let’s face it! I know you are embarrassed now, because I am according the f-word a clearer meaning, but that has always been the truth. Why should any aggression express as sexual assault?
This is really the truth, the truth of who we are as a people, as an organisation, as a nation. Of course, Ashok, the condition of our workplace defines the organisation culture!
Here is my question: how do I stop something which is so ingrained in the culture of people? In India, it is macho to abuse and frankly it has become a part of the everyday lexicon! It is considered ‘cool’ and there are TV shows that make a fashion statement of these words. Hence, it has a certain approval of the powers.
Kosha: Yes, it is as second nature as disrespect of women. As abuse of women. As rape of women. As long as this country and hence this company is led through the mind of a man, there will not be real empathy.
Tanisha: The only way to deal with this is via diktat.
Renee: Diktat needs guts and gore. There Must be tangible consequences and follow through on that. For instance, the next time someone is caught, will HR conduct an enquiry and punish? Will they dismiss? Therefore, will we instal foolproof systems to capture breach?
Kosha: What if the person is a high performer... will you be willing to sack him or penalise him for abusing?
Damayanti: Can we not have straight forward organisational codes of conduct — that language to be spoken should be clean, use of expletives totally not allowed.
Renee: I agree. Ashok, my point is if conduct is not linked to consequences there will be repeat bad behaviour.
Shukla: Even if HR enacts a code of conduct, will HR be bullied by line management? What if the person is a high performer? To my mind, these things work if you have the will to make it work and will not be corrupted by ‘Oh, but he is my best marketing guy or finance guy’ and so on.
Renee: I think there are two things here. Use of bad, unprofessional language and use of language that denigrates women. I can say we should severely penalise the latter, whether or not women were present when the expletives were used, on grounds that it is unprofessional.
Ashok Shukla agreed in principle, but he was not sure the men would buy that.
To be continued...
Meera Seth(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 20-04-2015)
