Ramabai and Ambedkar 1

Sharmila Rege champions the utility and significance of Ambedkarite feminism in the present context, cautioning against mainstream feminists’ appropriation of the caste question in gender pursuits hinting at ‘brahmanical surveillance’. It points to typical ways in which feminists deny the political contribution of feminism of Ambedkar. This is done most commonly by referring to the sphere of the personal or at other times labelling his contribution as being particularistic – limited to the social improvement of Dalit women. It also draws attention to the importance of exploring the ways in which public and personal spheres are constituted differently in diverse social locations. Therefore, a discussion on the ‘personal’ and the ‘political’, albeit briefly, becomes crucial for at least two reasons. Firstly, it is necessary to understand the paradox of the feminist denial of Ambedkar’s political contributions by referring selectively and erroneously to the personal sphere. Secondly, it is important to open up different meanings of the public and the private – spaces of household and community as they came to be fashioned by the Ambedkar movement – towards a more emancipatory notion of the modern in India. This chapter ties together several of the diverse strands of the Ambedkar-Ramabai exchanges towards a reformative future

Traditional medicine · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Historical Gender and Feminism Studies · Indian History and Philosophy · Medicine · Psychology