Tamil Nadu governor’s apology to journalist for patting her 'affectionately’ is shockingly lame
Purohit was supposed to answer the reporter, not ‘appreciate’ her.
At a press conference on April 17, Tamil Nadu governor Banwarilal Purohit patted a journalist "affectionately" when she asked him a question. If this wasn't bad enough, he later apologised, not for being inappropriate and improper, but for "hurting her feelings".
The press conference had centered around allegations of the governor’s involvement in the alleged sexual malpractices at a Tamil Nadu college. A charge which he had denied (more on that later).
The "patting" incident triggered outrage, with Tamil Nadu journalists writing to the governor. The reporter even said how she “rushed to the washroom and washed my face several times” after it. Purohit apologised on April 18, albeit lamely.
Even the reactions the journalist has faced on Twitter shows that everyone, including the governor, has missed the point entirely – that his action “was patronising at best and a violation of her rights as a woman at worst”.
No, it’s not just about her ‘feelings’
The governor had no business touching the journalist, no matter what the intent was. It was a violation of her personal space, of professional decorum, and of course, of the law. No human being should be touched without their consent.
Your Excellency, I have with me your letter expressing regret at what happened at the press conference in Chennai the previous day. I accept your apology, even though I am not convinced about your contention that you did it to appreciate a question I asked @TheWeekLive pic.twitter.com/JhjPOQy8UW
— Lakshmi Subramanian (@lakhinathan) April 18, 2018
Journalists demand an unconditional apology from TN Governor Banwarilal Purohit @TheWeekLive but here is what I have to say https://t.co/RtwCkpJ2Jr https://t.co/xnwbNngtpi
— Lakshmi Subramanian (@lakhinathan) April 18, 2018
The other issue arising from the governor’s behaviour is what women will easily indentify – men, when cornered with hard questions, resort to patronising the questioner.
Patronising is to treat someone “in a way that is apparently kind or helpful but that betrays a feeling of superiority”. Never pleasant, patronising is especially galling when the supremacy assumed is on account of gender.
Purohit, in his apology letter, says: “You had asked a question when we got up and were proceeding to leave after the close of the Press Conference. I considered that question to be a good one. Therefore as an act of appreciation for the question that you had posed, I gave a pat on your cheek considering you to be like my granddaughter. It was done with affection and to express my appreciation for your performance as a journalist, since I was also a member of that profession for about 40 years.”
Every line here is problematic. The journalist was not asking questions for appreciation or encouragement, she was doing her job. He was supposed to answer her, not appreciate her. As the governor pointed out, he has been a member of the profession for “40 years”, and hence should know this all the more.
Also, no matter how tenderly paternal he felt towards her, they were present at an official event in the capacity of the state’s governor and a journalist, clearly not an occasion to exercise grandfatherly impulses.
The apology gets worse. “I do understand from your mail that you are feeling hurt about the incident. I wish to express my regret and my apologies to assuage your sentiments that have been hurt.”
This is a typical way of illegitimising women’s concerns and is basically translates to – “I don’t really understand your problems because they involve illogical feelings, but since you have kicked up a fuss, here, take an apology”.
The governor should have apologised not for “hurting the journalist’s feelings”, but for breaking the law, being patriarchal, for breaching professional decorum, and for bringing disrepute to his own office.
With his apparent blindness towards gender and professional relations, it is worrisome that he is the one to order a probe into grave allegations at a Tamil Nadu university, and the report of the enquiry will also be submitted to him.
How is the governor involved in the 'sex for degree' scandal
Tamil Nadu for the past few days has been rocked by the "sex for degree" scandal, in which Purohit's name features too.
On Sunday, April 15, Nirmala Devi, a professor of Mathematics at Devanga Arts College in Aruppukottai, which is affiliated to the Madurai Kamaraj University (MKU), was arrested for allegedly trying to get students to have sexual relationships with university officials, in exchange for money and good grades.
In an audio clip which has gone viral, she is purportedly heard saying that she knows the governor well. Purohit has rubbished the allegations and as the chancellor of all state universities, has ordered a probe into the incident.
This has been criticised from several quarters, with many pointing out that the governor could not be awarding himself a clean chit and his role needs to be probed. On April 18, DMK members even staged a protest demanding Purohit’s resignation.
Concerns have also been raised that the governor has ordered the incident to be probed by a one-man inquiry commission, involving no women, as directed by the Supreme Court for cases involving sexual harassment. To this, Purohit has said that the IAS officer concerned was free to take the help of women if he wanted to.
The state government has ordered another probe into the Devanga College case.
As journalists questioned Purohit over the issue on Wednesday’s press conference, he scolded a reporter, “Don’t utter such words from your mouth”, because “I have a grandson and a great grandson. I am that lucky.”
Till the time people holding such high offices don't understand that their status as grandfathers in their personal life is no defence for their conduct publicly, India will not be as lucky.