Oppose Women Reservation

 

I also oppose the women reservation because I am of the opinion that those demanding reservation should first take up issues like female foeticide and female literacy if they want to bring about real change in our society.

Since time immemorial, Indian society has accorded respect to women. Now as a democracy, we have to give women a proper space in a significant way in the democratic setup. The tokenism of reservation for women must be converted into a meaningful and substantive role for them.

It is my conviction that reservation based on caste, creed, region and even on gender ends up in dividing society further, resulting in the benefit of a very select few. Not only this, reservations create further divides between the haves and the have-nots. This is the why we see demands for increasing the scope of reservations. Women's reservation bill is nothing but a populist move and it will contribute nothing towards women's empowerment. It will end up making a few hundred women MPs and MLAs, and that too, mostly from influential political families.

 

I have a simple question to ask all those who advocate women's reservation vociferously: did Indira Gandhi, Nandini Satpathy, Mayawati, Vasundhara Raje Scindia, Jaylalithaa and many others to count need any reservation to come to Parliament or to the state assemblies? They rose in public life it simply on their own merit, so why the talk of reservation for women's empowerment?  Despite being given no reservation, we see many women occupying top posts in sectors like administrative services, banking, media, IT and so on. Social change is a slow process and one should not impose it on people.  Political parties that are advocating reservation for women should first take up issues like female foeticide, women's literacy, malnourishment of the girl child, and so on, if they want to bring real change in our society and change the outlook of society towards women.  

 

The most unfortunate part of the whole debate that has taken a few days back is that people like Lalu Prasad (Disgusting)  and Mulayam Singh Yadav are demanding reservation within reservations. This will empower women but asking for quotas within quotas, as some are doing, will kill the bill since it may amount to rewriting the Constitution. If Lalu Prasad is so concerned about the welfare of OBC or Dalit women, why didn't he make a Dalit woman the chief minister of Bihar, in place of Rabri Devi? They the political leader are meant for their own welfare.

 

It is important that there be a constructive consensus behind women's reservation because it would usher in a new revolution in India. Those who talk of sub-categories of reservations for OBCs, or Dalit Muslims and Christians in this larger question of reservation need to know that in the last 60 years, as per our Constitution, we have given reservations only to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. Religion-based reservation is prohibited under the Constitution. Therefore, insistence over a sub-categorisation of reservation would have long-term disastrous consequences because this reservation then cannot be confined only to women and would have a spill-over effect for all, apart from its problematic legal position.

i m against reservation of any type.look at the reservation given to sc/st etc peopl.who is getting the benefit of this reservation ?only few families n their heirsn the system of reservation has stared the concept of reverse discrimination

With women reservation, there will be greater propensity to legislate anti-men laws. Fruther, the chances that antimen gender biased laws will ever be repealed will become zero. This is a sufficient reason to oppose women reservation in any form. 

Women reservation is for limited duration or for ever? If women reservation is for limited period say for 10 to 15 years and will automatically ends after the specified period of time its Ok, but if it is to remain for ever in the statue book, for me NO.

Well dear, all reservation is made for a limited duration- and every 10 years it is extended. Same will happen for women reservation too, to make it in perpetuity. India is the only country which claims that over 90% of its population deserves reservation. Rest 7-8% will be covered under women reservation and reservation under economic criteria. Reservation in India is nothing but a vote bank politics. I am sure in future reservation will be demanded on hundreds of other criteria....... well let me not digress. We are here to discuss women reservation, which should be opposed. I am opposing it because it is anti-men. I see it as an affront on men. It see it as gender biased. I see it as oppression of men. Hence I oppose such reservation for women.

Myth of discrimination against women:Discrimination against women since ages:
This is beginning of all debate- discrimination. In fact they have never been discriminated. In earlier society, hunting animals, farming land, travelling to distant places, war etc. were dangerous activities. Men took responsibilities of these activities and relatively easier and safer work like household maintenance and child rearing was assigned to women. It was not discrimination but privilege. And women willingly accepted this privilege- there is no evidence in history of a war between men and women through which it can be concluded that such activities were imposed on women. The whole logic of discrimination between men and women since ages is a sisnister propaganda against men.
Polygamy: As men were doing dangerous activities, the rate of date was very high in men. To give protection of women, when there are fewer men, this institution was prevalent.
Education: It is further argued that women were denied education in a systematic manner. This is false. In earlier days, education was not beneficial for economic activities (there were no salaried job you can get after getting education). In the beginning of noneteenth century the literarcy ration in india was hardly 5%, which was approximately 12% at the time of independence owing to huge effort of british government to spread education. I think hardly 1% of the population in India would be matriculate at the time of independence.
People dont take education for the sake of education- they take it if it is beneficial for economic activities, and dont take it if it is not beneficial. When the era of salaried job started, men started reading and when women started taking job, they also started taking education.
Job: Women do not do dangerous job. That is for men to do. When sailing was dangerous, men sailed; when it become easy, women want to do it. When war was dangerous, men fought; when war becomes easy through automation, women want to join army. I have no objection that they want to join it. I have no objection if they join it and do well. But i object the charge against men they they discriminated against women and they didnt allow them to join army for last so many centuries.
Even today many jobs are dangerous- posting in siachen, underground mining, fire fighting and there is no demand from women group of reservation in those job. When these jobs become easier, they will allege discrimination against men.
Thus there is no historical basis to give reservation.
Present under-representation:
The other logic of reservation is women’s under representation in various jobs, parliament, judiciary etc. A large percentage of women do not want to join labour force. They are very happy maintaining the household. Obviously when fewer women join labour force, there representation will be less. Representation cannot be imposed on those women.
See for example- politics. How many women participate or want to participate in politics? I think hardly a couple of percentage. Based on such participation, there representaion in parliament and state legislature is tremendous. Our society always promote them, probably that is good also. Already there is 33% reservation in local bodies. A women can join politics at that level, and after doing good work there can get herself elected in legislature and parliament.
Mere underrepresention cannot be a ground of reservation. We have to see reasons of such under representaion, and if there is any blockage, such blockage should be removed. I dont see and blockage, because women themselves do not want to participate in politics. Probably the activity is dangerous- you remove danger of politics and more women will participate and come to parliament.
If underrepresentaion is can be a ground of reservation, why not reserve seats for illiterates as they are not represented in bureaucracy or judiciary. Further the history is full of instances where literates & educated persons exploited illeterates. There must be reservation for illeterates! What a logic?