The first week of July filled our screens with photographs and videos of a young woman clad in a white and gold saree accepting the Kirti Chakra (posthumously) for her husband. Smriti Singh, wife of Late Captain Anshuman Singh opened up about her 8 years of relationship and how it was love at first sight. She remembered how Anshuman was intelligent, and the long-distance relationship tested and strengthened their love.
Smriti Singh, wife of Late Captain Anshuman Singh opened up about her 8 years of relationship and how it was love at first sight.
Her eyes brimming with tears resonated with the nation and soon sympathies kept piling. While we stood with her in her hour of need, her in-laws came to the camera to express their discontent over Smriti leaving their house with their son’s Kirti Chakra and an insurance sum of Rs. 1 crore. They have challenged the army’s next of kin rule and demand to be heard.
The tale of sadness soon turned into a vile display of greed, slander, and conspiracy. Veer Anshuman Singh’s memories were burdened by his family’s demands and the needs that didn’t suffice. A whiff of conspiracy began relentless media trials where the people supporting Smriti Singh soon turned against her. The slander, the objectification, and the hatred she faces are a direct result of our society’s expectations of the behaviour of a woman.
A “widow” must act like one
In the milieu of fanatic Hinduism when we are inching closer to paranoia every day, the idea that a “widow” wants to live alone and accepts her husband’s money and gallantry without sharing with his parents is inconceivable. She is celebrated and deified grieving along with her in-laws, clad in white. But the minute she steps out of this vicious circle of societal expectations, she is turned into a witch.
Our society has very stringent ideas about how widows must behave. Their clothes, demeanour, expressions, and actions are closely watched and judged. Veer Nari Smriti Singh, the wife of a martyr was pushed to the same scale and judged. She was supported till she remembered her husband and was vulnerable, but the moment she decided to take a step towards her life, the patriarchs came hounding.
Her life became a spectacle because politics, media, and people suddenly got interested in her life and finances.
Her life became a spectacle because politics, media, and people suddenly got interested in her life and finances. Suddenly everyone was an expert on family values and humanity. She became more vulnerable at a time when she deserved to be protected, all because she didn’t act like a “widow”. The fate of a woman after her husband dies in this society is pitiable, and holding media trials to prove her wrong is vile.
The objectification of Smriti Singh
A married woman guarded by her husband is protected and respected by the society. But a woman who has lost her husband becomes an object of pleasure for anyone to devour. Post the presidential ceremony of receiving Kirti Chakra for her husband, Smriti faced the horror of lewd comments on social media. The wife of a martyr was objectified and comments were made about her body, appearance, and the desires of men when they looked at her.
A woman is an object of desire who must be guarded by a man. After the death of the man, she is reduced to a spectacle. The National Commission for Women has taken cognisance of such comments and filed an FIR. The men who have posted such comments are the epitome of toxic masculinity. The need to evaluate every woman’s body and presume the supreme right of possession is worrisome and vicious.
Even the dictates that govern society advise women to take refuge in a man’s presence, but what happens when the man dies? A widow is dressed in white to indicate purity and grief but the toxic men saw the opportunity to slander her presence and malign her body.
The objectification did not stop at the scandalous comments, it became worse when social media mistakenly presumed Reshma Sebastian to be Smriti Singh. The two women have similar features and hairstyles. The moment social media caught the model’s sight and mistook her for the martyr’s wife began the saga of judging. Every unrelated individual gasped at the audacity of Smriti to dare to flaunt her beauty in front of the camera.
Why even today, do we need to see a widow vulnerable and in tears? Why does grief need to be visibly apparent?
The problem with the entire scenario was not just the false identity but the people assumed there was no grief through the model’s poses in front of the camera. A widow’s grief is measured through her clothes and mannerisms. Even if the model was Smriti, why doesn’t a woman have the agency to dress up the way she wants and flaunt herself? Why even today, do we need to see a widow vulnerable and in tears? Why does grief need to be visibly apparent?
What does a woman own?
Smriti’s problems did not end with the world judging her but extended to her home. Anshuman Singh’s parents alleged that Smriti had left their home with the Kirti Chakra, a photo album and Rs. 1 crore. Mr Ravi Pratap Singh and Manju Singh claim that their daughter-in-law doesn’t live with them anymore and receives most of the entitlements after their son’s death.
Anshuman’s father alleges Smriti has moved to her Gurdaspur home from Lucknow with their son’s clothes, a cherished photo album, and Kirti Chakra. Manju Singh agrees to these statements and adds, ‘On July 5, I attended the award ceremony at Rashtrapati Bhavan with Smriti. When we were leaving the event, upon the insistence of Army officers, I held Kirti Chakra for a photo once. But after that, Smriti took the Kirti Chakra from my hands.’
In an episode of benevolence, the couple admitted that they had suggested Smriti to marry their other son, as Smriti and Anshuman were married for just 5 months and did not have a child. The parents have reduced 8 years of relationship to just 5 months of nuptial relationship because marriage is a socially acceptable institution and love holds no such importance. The simplicity of the statement is scary, the suggestion that a man and a woman are bonded for life and if the man dies, he could be replaced by a brother.
The Manusmriti says, ‘On failure of issue (by her husband) a woman who has been authorised, may obtain, (in the) proper (manner prescribed), the desired offspring by (cohabitation with) a brother-in-law or (with some other) Sapinda (of the husband).’
It is the twenty-first century and we are still depending on archaic patriarchal texts. These texts that map our conscience sub-consciously decide how we act. Marrying the brother is not just advised because there is no child, but also because there is money involved. The assertion that Smriti has taken the entire sum of one crore rupees is both worrying and unnecessary.
The Army is clear in its Next of Kin rule. When a soldier is newly appointed, the NOK is the parent.
The Army is clear in its Next of Kin rule. When a soldier is newly appointed, the NOK is the parent. After marriage, the spouse supersedes them as NOK (next of kin). In Anshuman’s case also his will reflects that he wanted to divide the lump sum of one crore halfway between his parents and his wife, and the pension to go to his wife. She was not just a legal companion but a lover, they had dreamt of a future they could not live and to reduce all of this to a debate of who deserves the better part of the martyr’s money is vicious.
Smriti Singh has maintained a dignified silence. She hasn’t spoken to media houses and seems to be in no hurry to say her piece, but it is the society that must answer her. How can a martyr’s wife be hounded by lewd comments and salacious remarks? Have we lost all sense of respect and boundaries while treating women? Does a widow need to be judged on how she carries her widowhood or what memory she claims to be hers?
All these questions reverberate and the echoes fill the ecosystem of a failed patriarchy. Toxic masculinity and the need to possess any woman is scary especially when it comes to widows. How does a widow survive in this time and what can she do to be accepted?
