Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Mamata Banerjee and the downfall of her symbolic feminism

Mamata Banerjee built a politics of presence for women. But when it came to principle, that presence often rang hollow.

Mamata Banerjee stood as a political anomaly for years, standing defiantly outside the mould that has long constrained women in Indian politics. She did not inherit a legacy, nor did she rely on the careful calibration of femininity that many women leaders are expected to perform. She was combative, street-smart, and singularly powerful. In a political landscape that often reduces women to tokens or dynasts, Banerjee carved out a space that felt almost insurgent.

She belonged to a rare league alongside J Jayalalithaa, Mayawati and Sheila Dikshit — women who dominated politics and were almost revered in their states. But over time, with Jayalalithaa and Dikshit’s death and as Mayawati’s influence waned, Banerjee became the last of that generation still standing. She was, in many ways, the final emblem of the fiercely independent and openly defiant kind of female political power in India.

Yet, what made Banerjee exceptional also masked a contradiction that came sharply into focus in the last few years. While her politics projected empowerment, her responses to violence against women often undercut that very claim. She always toed the line between image and instinct, showing limits of what might be called symbolic feminism.

Banerjee, in her three terms, rolled out a suite of welfare schemes aimed at women with........

© ThePrint