Happy Women's Day

After 20 posts, I have realized that most of them are about politics. Since the description of my blog says otherwise I decided to make amends.

Today is "International Woman's Day". The recent attacks on women by fanatics like Pramod Mutalik and also on couples on Valentine's Day once again goes to show the alarming levels of gender inequality that is still prevalent in India. More importantly, while 54% of the population is under 25, most of our politicians are over 50 who wish to stick old ideology and beliefs. The problem is also that none of the younger leaders are prepared to speak up. Rahul Gandhi, claimed to be popular among the youth by the Congress, didn't even opened his mouth against the pub incident. He publicly stated that he doesn't believes in Valentine's Day. (Read my earlier article on Rahul). Other than Renuka Choudary and Brinda Karat, there haven't been too many voices even from the women politicians. This is despite the fact that organizations like Sri Ram Sena lack mass support.

Issues such as sex-education, pre-marital sex, etc can just not be discussed openly in India. It is horrific to hear from such organizations claiming that 'Love is foreign to India'. People like Khushboo who have voiced their opinion publicly had to face enormous hardships. If this is the case in urban areas, what about rural India where centuries old practices and beliefs are still prevalent.

A lot has already been written in the mainstream media about the importance that gender equality and empowerment of women plays in the overall development of any society. So I do not wish to repeat what has already been said and to a large extent well understood as well. The more important question is How do we achieve it? Moreover how do we achieve it within the constraints that democracy poses us. India is a democracy unlike China. China had its cultural revolution from 1966-78, aimed at bringing about cultural change. This was imposed on the entire population and was not at all peaceful. In India, any acceptable change has to be brought in an extremely careful manner.

Honestly, I do not have any answer to this. If answering this question would have been so simple, i am sure that there are smarter people around who would have cracked this. So I have chosen this occasion to talk about the impact of "Reservation of 1/3rd seats for women in panchayats" which was brought in place in 1993 after an amendment. This has been referred to as "the greatest social experiment ever". Upon adding the numbers, there are more women elected representatives in India than the rest of the world.

Skeptics might argue that it is still the men who take most of the decisions and women are mere proxies. Most probably it is true. But atleast it has brought some amount change in the general attitude of the people towards women. This has got them an entry point, something that would not have been possible without reservation. Changing the rural mindset which has considered women as doormats for centuries is not easy. With such a system in place, it would atleast stop such outdated ideas from percolating to the next generation. Bringing about social change is never easy and it should never be forced. Change has to be brought about at the grassroots level. The effectiveness of this system cannot be judged as yet. The system has been in place for only 15 years and it would take atleast two generations of such reservations to really break the barriers created over centuries.

Woman sarpanches are slowly making their presence felt. They known to work much more on drinking water and education. They are much more honest. The success of this reservations clearly goes to show that reservation for woman at the top may not make such a huge difference as would reservation at the panchayat level. Increasingly there have been demands to increase the reservation to 50% since the woman population is roughly 50% of the total population. Some states like Bihar have already done. Moreover, reservation is important because it has been observed that once the seat is dereserved, almost 40% of woman choose not to contest. India's poor record on HDI index can expect to recieve a boost in the long run.

A professor(with over 25 years of teaching experience) of mine was once discussing this issue. He recalled, how over all these years the pschyche of female students changed. While female students of the 80's and 90's would be vocal and aggressive about their rights, the present day female students almost assume equality. Unfortunately, we are still ruled by oldies who have not broadened their thinking. So honestly, I do not really expect large scale change in the short term. As they say, democracy works slowly.

Happy Women's Day.

Rahul Gandhi - Is he really a youth icon?

The Congress is projecting him as their youth face claiming that he represents the young India. But does he really represents that or is he an 'old wine in a new bottle'? Here are a few pointers that will answer this question:

1. Just type his name on Wikipedia to check profile. It says, "His admission to St Stephen's College was controversial as he was admitted on the basis of his abilities as a competitive pistol shooter, which was disputed. He left the school in 1990, after one year of education".


2. The Wiki page also says that, "It is reported that Harvard alumni records list him as attending between 1990 and 1993 but not as completing a degree".


3. He is said to have done MPhil in Development Studies from Cambridge. The MPhil Development Studies program requires 4 full papers to be completed and it lists 60% as a pass, 65% as eligible for an entry to PhD and 75% as a Distinction. But the real shocker is in the Paper on National Economic Planning & Policy? he scored 58% which is not even considered a Pass.Why do we need such an average mind when we have got brilliant minds like Manmohan Singh. (Source)
   


4. Rahul Gandhi had publicly stated that he did not believe in Valentine's Day. He did not utter a word on the 'Bangalore pub incident'. So how on earth is he different from his older party colleagues.


5. He was a prominent figure in a high profile Congress campaign for the 2007 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections; Congress, however, won only 22 seats with 8.53% of votes.Congress has been known to give credit of every major or minor political victory to the Gandhi family while the family is never known to accept any failure of whatsoever scale.


6. He has criticized the Gujarat Govt. for the incentives it provided for Nano. His own Prime Ministerial candidate, Manmohan Singh said the following at the centenary celebrations of Tatas, "I compliment my friend Ratan Tata, his colleagues Shri J.J. Irani and Shri Muthuraman, for their leadership and for their vision. Our country owes a great deal to such dynamic patriotic leaders of Indian business. They create wealth, they create employment, they create new capabilities and they create new possibilities for all our people". (Source)

Just like the case of his father (who was anointed to the throne soon after Indira Gandhi was assasinated), the Congress party workers want to get him straight to the Prime Ministers Chair, even though he is yet to prove himself as an administrator. They blindly want to get another Gandhi. The brand Gandhi is the biggest brand in the country. All in all, Rahul is in no way different from other politicians. As I stated earlier, 'an old wine in new bottle'.