India, Dec. 20 -- I watched the video clip of Bihar chief minister (CM) Nitish Kumar tugging at the hijab on a young woman's face in utter disbelief. It was a public event in the state and the woman - Dr Nusrat Parveen - was there to receive her appointment letter for a government job in the AYUSH medical programme from the CM. As the camera captured the bizarre moment, you can see the deputy CM of the state - the BJP's Samrat Chaudhary - gently pulling at Nitish Kumar's kurta to try and pull him back. Since then, the debate has been diverted to a predictably shrill one about the veil. This is a red herring. It is actually irrelevant whether you support the hijab or you do not. Personally, I have never been a fan of any custom or tradition, in any religion, that requires more "modesty" from women than men. Context can also alter the symbol. In Iran, the women-led street fight against the hijab is also a fight against a State that institutionally discriminates against women. In another part of the world, some women have embraced the hijab to make a point about identity. In Karnataka, a few years ago, the BJP government that was in power then banned the hijab in State-run classrooms. Then too, I argued that while I was opposed to a norm that required women to hide their face (but not men), if it meant more girls could get an education, surely that was the more important battle to fight. In the present instance too, there are reports that Dr Nusrat Parveen may opt out of the job that could have been hers to take, insulted and perhaps understandablyuncomfortable at all the attention on her. But, none of this is central to what unfolded in Bihar. Surely, a man cannot reach out and touch the face (or any other part of the body) or a piece of clothing on a woman without her consent. When the man is a stranger and he is also in a position of power compared to the woman, the act becomes even more egregious. Nitish Kumar's behaviour was entirely inappropriate and crossed the line. He should apologise to the female doctor. This issue is not about Hindu vs Muslim or hijab vs ghoonghat. This is quite simply about a man respecting a red line when it comes to the bodily autonomy and security of a woman. This is about misogyny and power differential. And the reactions to the incident reflect the deeply entrenched patriarchy of our system. Uttar Pradesh minister Sanjay Nishad chuckled, unchallenged, while remarking on the hijab-pulling incident. "He's a man. Why such an uproar for touching the niqab? What if he had touched her elsewhere?" The subtext of the wink-wink-nudge-nudge remark was that men have a licence to touch that should be indulged. Union minister Giriaj Singh defended what Nitish Kumar did and claimed it was about identity confirmation. Worse, he then declared, the woman doctor "could go to hell (jahannam)" if she opted to turn down the job. Is this what Nitish Kumar wants his legacy to be? The irony is staggering. This is the same CM who has romped home to power on the back of the female vote and whose women-friendly schemes run the entire gamut, from the 10,000-rupee mahila welfare scheme to giving girls in villages cycles so that fewer of them would drop out of schools that were often miles away. Even the hotly debated prohibition scheme backed by Nitish Kumar was brought in to avoid the consequences of alcohol-driven domestic violence. So women-centric have his policies and politics been that social scientist professor Ashwani Kumar called Bihar India's first "maternalist" state. For the same CM to now stand accused of breaching a woman's private space should both embarrass and concern him and his supporters. Yes, I do agree with those JD(U) supporters who argue that Nitish Kumar did not act with the intent to violate her. But, even if we agree, he was being a paternalistic "uncle" figure urging a young woman to drop the hijab and reveal her face with freedom and even if the intentions were decent or innocuous, the norms of acceptable behaviour were violated. After all, this was not a security check at an airport or the allegation of impersonation by a person. The last significant time a politician of any standing did this was in Kashmir during the elections of 2004. Mehbooba Mufti, PDP leader, stormed into a polling station in Srinagar and lifted the burqa off the face of a female voter. As the issue stormed into a raging row, she claimed she was trying to ensure that no bogus votes were cast using the veil as cover. That throwback was invoked by Jammu and Kashmir CM Omar Abdullah this week as he demanded to know what would have happened had a Muslim man lifted the veil off a Hindu woman's face. Throughout the campaign in Bihar earlier this year, there were whispers and even open attacks on Nitish Kumar's health and alertness. He silenced his critics with his handsome win. That win was powered by women. Whatever be the reason that the CM did something so out of normal for his otherwise non-controversial personality, he should pick up the phone and apologise to the woman doctor....