Not really.
The women in power may well be the sari/salwar-clad mouthpieces of the actually powerful (read rich/influential) ones in the field of politics. There may actually be deserving men in a constituency reserved for women. Generalizations always fail with certainty when it comes to characterizing men or women as belonging to the gender that has better administrative skills. There are extremes (morons/mighty managers) as well as moderate ones in both genders and the intelligence or ability is purely a subjective matter.
People all aound are harping about the so-called upliftment of women, just because a bill allowing one-third of the seats in the Parliament to be occupied by women was successfully tabled in the Rajya Sabha. How on earth does this uplift "women" as a whole?? Well, other than Sushma Swaraj and Brinda Karat hugging each other, I do not see any great positive development that this bill might spawn.
Does this thing about upliftment mean that only women MPs will work for the betterment of women in the country?
Or maybe, the very presence of some women in the Parliament is considered to be some kind of a success. I remember reading an article about the Attendance of MPs in the Rajya Sabha prior to the Elections in May'09. The women (mostly from the cine field, who happen to get in easily) had extremely poor attendance and a very poor questioning record.
As an Indian Citizen, I would demand that the human being representing me in the Houses of the Parliament or the Legislative Assembly is efficient and takes proper measures to see to that the represented area progresses in all fields and copes up with dynamically arising problems. I don't give a damn about my representative being a man or a woman, as long as the person is capable.
"BJP-CPI supporting Cong in this Bill" might well be an act of garnering popularity (or better still, avoiding ill-reputation by opposing it). For, after all, we are supposedly a nation that "respects" women (against whom, incidentally, most crimes in the country are committed) and speaking well of the Bill (that "uplifts" the noble gender) in public will add to the respectability of the Party.
The women in power may well be the sari/salwar-clad mouthpieces of the actually powerful (read rich/influential) ones in the field of politics. There may actually be deserving men in a constituency reserved for women. Generalizations always fail with certainty when it comes to characterizing men or women as belonging to the gender that has better administrative skills. There are extremes (morons/mighty managers) as well as moderate ones in both genders and the intelligence or ability is purely a subjective matter.
People all aound are harping about the so-called upliftment of women, just because a bill allowing one-third of the seats in the Parliament to be occupied by women was successfully tabled in the Rajya Sabha. How on earth does this uplift "women" as a whole?? Well, other than Sushma Swaraj and Brinda Karat hugging each other, I do not see any great positive development that this bill might spawn.
Does this thing about upliftment mean that only women MPs will work for the betterment of women in the country?
Or maybe, the very presence of some women in the Parliament is considered to be some kind of a success. I remember reading an article about the Attendance of MPs in the Rajya Sabha prior to the Elections in May'09. The women (mostly from the cine field, who happen to get in easily) had extremely poor attendance and a very poor questioning record.
As an Indian Citizen, I would demand that the human being representing me in the Houses of the Parliament or the Legislative Assembly is efficient and takes proper measures to see to that the represented area progresses in all fields and copes up with dynamically arising problems. I don't give a damn about my representative being a man or a woman, as long as the person is capable.
"BJP-CPI supporting Cong in this Bill" might well be an act of garnering popularity (or better still, avoiding ill-reputation by opposing it). For, after all, we are supposedly a nation that "respects" women (against whom, incidentally, most crimes in the country are committed) and speaking well of the Bill (that "uplifts" the noble gender) in public will add to the respectability of the Party.
8 comments:
It's not over yet..!
1. There is the quota within the quota game to be played... x% for OBC women, Y%for SC/ST women, Z% for women from minorities and so on.. (It never ends in India)
2. Probable unfit female candidates getting elected.
3. Probability (actually, it is certainty) of mere mouth pieces as candidates like u said... (It has happened time and again across various states, even in TN by-elections...)
4. And then the rotation system that promises to kick out the possibly suitable male candidates for quite a while.(Think what will happen if the quota within quota idea(?) is implemented.. OBC woman rules for 5 years. SC woman for next five. ST for the next. And then the Muslim minority, Sikh minority, the tribal minorities, the economically backward, the socially backward... Men? WTH? )
The mere act of reservation of seats shows the inequality present in the society. And mere reservation cant remove it either.
U have a very valid point. We can better be off to find suitable candidates to lead the nation. Who cares if its a man or woman?!
At worst, this bill will help women. Women have already proved their merit and no one need be worried about adverse effects. Giant leap is an exaggeration, true. But a leap, nevertheless.
Let's say we have a law that says "Men and women are equal". How do you monitor that? Quantify it? Enforce it?
Saying that women can fight out discrimination by themselves is plain naive. I think we are biased into that opinion by our own environment. There are plenty of villages where child marriages go on. Women from there will never know that there are such things as free world, unless..
I think this is not about choosing the best representative, rather about forcing the parties to nominate a women from places where there is so much discrimination that they have no chance otherwise.
If they are influenced by their husbands, it's the same thing, right? If not for the reservation, their husbands would rule. This way, we have a hope that they might renege one day.
People are not inherently morons/mighty managers. They are a product of their environment. If you have a society where women are never given power, then they never are going to rise. (There are superwomen who defy, like Curie, but what about the rest?) This is the rationale behind most reservation policies. It is open to abuse, but even free markets are open to abuse. That's the way of the world.
If they do any of the tricks you are concerned about, then don't vote for them!
As for respect, there is no nation that can claim to have 'respected' its women, by the criteria you claim.
@ Both Arun annas: Thanks a lot for reading and giving ur opinions. And though I've opposed Reservation, the points elaborated by Arun(twins' bro)do sound valid. But the reasons seem to hinge too much on "what might happen". I'd love to see the day when all those "might"s come true. But will they??
Moreover, as you said, a woman who has grown in an environment that is not conducive to her managerial skill development, how will bringing her to the fore help her society? Won't they be put under an incompetent leader? Personally to her, it might be advantageous to the extent that she gains popularity and yes, money. But from what I can observe in my own life, I can say that a woman brought up to be shy has a probability of one in a hundred to suddenly exhibit wonderful administrative abilities. Our adaptable women tend to get used to the abuse and may even accept it as a way of life. I don't mean to say that at present we have great leaders in the Assemblies, but at least, they do know the tricks of the trade and will not be as gullible as these women might be.
"Hope"- we all can and do!
But the plain reality is there for us to see.
Hmmm.. I do see the plain facts, but in a different light. I reiterate that reservation was never about best or brightest.
I'm sure you have some ideas about how social equality can be achieved.
Nice post. Keep it up.
Post a Comment