In school,I never liked class representatives. They were the people who never conveyed my problems since they always had their own agendas to fulfil. We were being told that they are the superior people with better understanding of how to speak to teachers, we have to tell all our problems to them because teachers cannot talk to every stupid student and solve the issue. I don’t have a single memory of having my any issue solved and presented before higher authorities. More importantly, the prefects used to dictate us and use to teach us to be more discipline, to do what we should do instead of what we are doing. To read more to study in their way so we might get chance to their position. Those prefects were full of themselves as they always had something of their own in their minds.They would have tests which they had already prepared for and they will never ask from dull students or, should I say, lower class students if we agree with the syllabus or not. If they find it easy, then that will be the syllabus of the test. So, I developed a sense of suspect for the people who claim to represent the certain class or a group, the idea of representation is often brings exploitation and misrepresentation and self-projection. When the colonisation occurred, the British took burden of representing the people of the east. They made us realise and present into the world as well that we cannot govern ourselves so we have to be governed and this whole process of colonisation is not seen as exploitation rather presented as a project of civilisation. So, the idea of speaking for others is a power driven phenomenon in which the person who claims to be the liberator turn into the a person who takes away the individual identity of the ones they claim to speak for. Women dealing with oppression and working hard might not even know that they are included and talked about in such marches The recently held aurat march was a good effort by privileged class women. The slogans they were carrying looked like a competition to toxic social media masculinity. There were others which were shedding light on genuine issues like education, health facilities and, of course, consent. I have no objection on privileged class women claiming public space but I do have a problem when they say that they are here for women. I have a problem with the pluralistic use of the word woman. The question is, what you are claiming to have isn’t what you’ve already got? Freedom of expression? Liberty to protest? To speak, raise voice? Now what you are demanding isn’t even the concern for most woman who are actually deprived of such privileges. There are women who are indifferent to this march. Women dealing with oppression and working hard might not even know that they are included and talked about in such marches. What idea of feminism you are going to give to men of this country who are already controlling every aspect of a woman’s life, be it how to dress, how to think, what to opted for study, to study or not to study, what to speak, what not to speak, how to speak, how to laugh etc. In a society where man is fanatically controlling woman, what ways are you using to bring a feminist discourse? Don’t you think that you are villainising feminism? The problems you are presenting could be your problem but it does not account for middle and working class women. So, the point is what can you do? You need to create a space for the oppressed without acting like you’re the saviour of these women. Let them be encouraged to speak rather than forcing down a rigid feminist narrative. There is a strong need to let the oppressor speak and listen to them. Privileged class woman is also subjected to patriarchal tyranny but the way she is oppressed is different than a lower and middle class woman’s oppression. So, if you are speaking for yourself please do not include all women under the umbrella. Do speak for yourself but let the oppressed speak for themselves. Published in Daily Times, March 13th 2019.