International Women’s Day
is a time for celebration, to mark the challenges women have overcome in the
fight for equality. But it’s also a time for honest stocktaking, and this is
particularly relevant in India where women suffer from severe disabilities. The
answer may lie less in legislation like the Women’s Reservation Bill and more
in women supporting each other, building political bases from the grassroots
and fighting those tough battles that need to be fought
The biggest challenge
facing Indian women today is the criminalization of India’s polity and its
domination by money and muscle power. The governance machinery is heavily
criminalized and corruption scams are a product of that criminalization. Any
society where violence and crime dominate, women tend to get marginalized. The answer
does not lie in demanding reserved quotas in legislatures. The answer lies in
decriminalizing the machinery of governance and decriminalizing our
polity. A polity in which crime and corruption thrive and is therefore
hostile even to honest men cannot possibly be women friendly.
India has taken some baby steps on the road to decriminalizing our polity. For
instance, the new rules and regulations about disclosure of assets, etc. are
good. But there is no system in place for taking action if the person
concerned under reports or under values assets. The system requires a far more thorough
overhaul. However, very often in the
name of course correction, we add far more problems. Take the example of
election expenditure; it’s an accepted fact that the expenditure mandated by
the Election Commission is totally unrealistic. These days even Delhi
University elections are not fought within that limit.
Now when an unrealistic
and impractical law is made, people will find ways of sabotaging that provision
and find underhand means of doing it. No one can say that money power is not
playing an important role in our elections; no one can say that bribes are not
given on election eve, or freebies and all manners of inducements are not
offered to buy votes, all this is happening despite a fairly vigilant Election
Commission. So the rules of the game need to change far more drastically.
Lack of Political Base
The
slower the overhaul and reform of government and governance, the slower will be
the pace at which women will come into their own. Take for example the current
Cabinet, it’s not that there are no women there but most of them don’t have a
political base. They are there because somebody or the other gave them
‘patronized entry’. By contrast, somebody like Sumitra Mahajan is there in her
own right. She has won elections time and again on her own strength and
therefore her presence has a different kind of meaning than the presence of
those who are Rajya Sabha material, don’t have their own political base and who
are there only because a powerful male leader patronized them.
It’s only when women with
an independent political base start coming into politics, when women are
mobilized in the manner our caste leaders mobilize their caste brethren as vote
banks that women leaders will carry some weight and clout. But very few women leaders are working in that
direction. The few who have cared to mobilize a political base of their own
become even more powerful than men. Whatever the flaws in the style of functioning
of Mamata Banerjee, Mayawati or Jayalalitha -- all these women are powerful in
their own right and even men tremble before them. Why? Because they don’t
depend on men, on the contrary male leaders curry favour with them.
They are far from ideal
politicians but it goes to their credit that they created their own political
base and therefore they actually represent the face of the empowered women. But
a notable feature about successful women politicians in India is that most of
them have turned out to be very whimsical, vindictive and cranky. There are a few exceptions like Sheila Dikshit
and Anandiben Patel—both of whom have maintained a measure of restraint in
their behaviour.
However, the tragedy of
Indian politics is that the women who succeed, like Mamata Banerjee, Sonia
Gandhi, or Mayawati, do so by proving they can outcompete men in the dirt and
grime of politics. They can outdo men in all the wheeling and dealing required
to win elections. So their presence doesn’t improve the nature and quality of
politics. This is quite contrary to the
Gandhian vision. Gandhi believed that women would lead the war against war,
that women’s entry into politics would cleanse politics, it would rid politics
of money and muscle power and it would bring benign feminine qualities into
play. But what we are witnessing is the very opposite: women are masculinising
themselves rather than feminizing politics. They are proving themselves no less crooked than
men and often far more authoritarian and power crazed than men.
These women are
remarkable in their own right but have played the game by the rules created by
the worst of male politicians. That is
why none of them are women friendly because they are not cleansing politics.
Political parties are the
prime instruments of democracy. If they are run as personal fiefdoms, if there
is no inner party democracy and transparency in their decision making
processes, such parties cannot nurture real talent. Only sycophants and manipulators can thrive
in such outfits. So you cannot enhance the participation of women in any
meaningful way in our polity, if the nature of our political parties and institutions
of governance, don’t change radically.
Thus far BJP has
attracted far more women workers than most other parties. It has even more
women spokespersons than any other party and yet not many women leaders in the
BJP can be said to be powerful in their own right. Even a senior like Sushma
Swaraj depends on CM of Madhya Pradesh, Shivraj Chauhan to provide her a
"safe" seat.
Ironically, we now have
several women headed political parties - Sonia Gandhi leads the Congress, Jayalalitha
heads AIADMK, Mamata Banerjee is the unquestioned leader of Trinamool Congress,
Mehbooba Mufti of PDP and Mayawati of BSP. But that hasn't really brought forth
women as a powerful bloc within these parties. At best, they are brought in for
street demonstrations and electioneering. But they haven't emerged as strong
satraps with ground support.
The case of AAP, the
newest entrant on the political scene is the most interesting. Though this
party has adopted the most politically correct position on women's rights, and
has a couple of effective female spokespersons, not many women got or won on
AAP tickets. And there is not a single woman in Kejriwal's new cabinet. No one
is complaining that Rakhi Bidlan has been dropped because she was quite a joke as
Women and Child Development Minister during Kejriwal’s first stint as CM.
Today, women are taking
more interest in politics. In drawing room conversations earlier men would herd
together on one side discussing politics while women would be discussing family
affairs. But now at least educated women are engaged in political discussions,
they are taking an independent stand, they are more engaged in public
affairs. But that has not translated
into women being organised as a steadfast vote bank. This despite the fact that
issues of women's safety, mobility, access to education and jobs are fairly
high in public discourse and almost every party swears by the need to strengthen
women's rights.
Taking Short Cuts
This situation has arisen
because women in politics themselves are taking shortcuts and want to continue
their dependence on men. Women in India have a distinct history in comparison
say with women from Western countries, where they had to fight fierce battles
to find a space for themselves in public life and politics. The right of women to
vote in America and Europe came after very prolonged and bitter struggle. Right to equality, equal pay
for equal work, took long battles which women waged on their own strength. So
they came to organize themselves as a viable vote bank. They mobilized women qua
women to take charge of their own affairs, instead of merely waiting for men to
give them their due
In India, starting from
the 19th century reform movements to the Gandhi-led freedom
movement we have witnessed male reformers take up women's issues. These men
faced the brunt of social criticism for challenging discriminatory and
oppressive social norms vis a vis women. They protected women from direct
attacks. Numerous male reformers in different regions of India dedicated their entire lives to
removing crippling restrictions and social disabilities imposed on women. As a
result of tireless efforts of men like Ishwarchandra Vidyasagar in Bengal,
Justice Ranade and Mahatma Phule in Maharashtra, Veeransalingam in Andhra, Lala Devraj in Punjab and a host of others in
different parts of India, women could begin to reclaim their lost rights in the
public domain, including the right to education and jobs in the
"Modern" sectors of the economy.
During the freedom
movement, especially after it came to be led by Mahatma Gandhi, women's rights
movement received even greater strength and support. It is noteworthy that as
early as 1919, the Congress party elected Annie Besant as its president. In
1925, Sarojini Naidu became the president of the Congress and by 1930, the
Congress Party formally passed a resolution that in free India, women would be
guaranteed constitutional equality. Thus the right to vote, the right to hold
political office, the right to equal pay for equal work, etc. came to Indian
women much before many of the European countries were ready for it. What is
more it came without having to beg, grovel or fight against men. By contrast,
women in western countries had to face enormous hostility and humiliation
including violent attacks in their struggle for these rights.
But this spontaneous
support Indian women got from men also led to a culture of dependence unlike in
the West where women learnt to fight largely on their own steam. It also means
men can draw the line—thus far and no more any time they decide to do so. In
India women did not need to wage a gender war against men to claim their due.
Mahatma Gandhi in particular worked hard to create a respect worthy space for
women in public life. He wanted women to be leaders of men and not come mainly
to add numbers in the movement. He reiterated time and again that his choice of
non-violence as a weapon of struggle had a lot to do with wanting to see women
play a leading role in the freedom movement. It’s well established that
whenever violence dominates social life women get pushed to the margins but
when non-violence is adopted as a dharma, women don’t have much difficulty in
proving themselves equal or even better than men. That is why during the Gandhi
led freedom movement numerous women like Kamladevi Chattopadhyaya and Hansa
Mehta emerged in different parts of India and they were not just confined to
the women's wing of the Congress party but became leaders of men as well. In
those days, Congress had committed party workers in every city, town, district
and even at the village level.
Biwi Beti Girl Friend Brigade of
Indian politics
However in post
independence India as money and muscle power came to slowly dominate our
political life, women started falling behind. This is because Nehru did not
care to democratize the machinery of governance. He let the same old colonial
system of administration continue unchecked. Since lack of accountability is
inherent in the system that the British left behind, corruption and tyranny are
its inevitable products. In this system, holding a political office is as good
as holding a loot license. Hence politics too became a game of plunder. In such
a situation even honest men find it difficult to survive in politics. It is
noteworthy that most eminent Gandhians withdrew themselves from the electoral
arena and confined themselves to social work. Therefore, the only kind of women
who found a place in politics were those who could be as ruthless and
unscrupulous as men or those who got a patronized entry into politics through
familial connections with powerful political satraps. Today, most women
politicians fall in the category of Biwi Beti Brigade. The reservation of women
at panchayat and zila parishad level has strengthened this tendency. Men who
are asked to vacate their seat for a term because its reserved for women,
manage to convince the party bosses that the seat should be assigned to their
wife or some other female relative so it remains a safe citadel for the family.
Barring exceptions, such women
are there to safeguard their family interests not to safeguard the interests of
women or their constituents. They are willing to play by the same foul rules of
the game that men play. That’s why their presence in politics does not work to
empower women as a group.
But things have gotten
far worse in the last decade and a half. If earlier, the Biwi Beti Brigade
cornered whatever little space was available to women in politics, now
girlfriends and mistresses are also claiming that space. The earlier generations
of politicians too had their 'aiyyashi' but they kept that side of their
life under cover. But today, the "casting couch" phenomenon has
raised its ugly head in virtually every political party. One hears horrid
accounts of how young women who are not connected to any powerful male leader
through family ties have to oblige male leaders in demeaning ways. Sexual
exploitation in political parties is no less rampant than in the film or
fashion industry.
Earlier, the girl friends
and mistresses of politicians were kept in the background. Now these women are
flaunting themselves openly and demanding not just party tickets to fight elections
but also ministerial berths. So if we introduce reserved quota for women in our
legislature, this new breed is likely to corner a large chunk of the quota
along with the Biwi Beti Brigade. At least, the wives and daughters commanded a
measure of respect from male politicians because they maintained a degree of
dignity in their conduct with men. But women who use powerful men to climb up
are treated with utter disdain by their party colleagues. They also have a very
demoralising effect on other young women seeking a foothold in politics. The
message is clear - your work doesn't but ability to manipulate men or willingness
to be subservient to men's needs is what takes you forward. This is an
important factor why ordinary women who value their dignity and don’t wish to
use sex for climbing up, shun politics. Since ordinary women are averse to
joining politics because of such adverse conditions, every party is short of
women workers. This is an important reason why not enough women get tickets.
Those who feel concerned
about the inadequacy of female representation in our politics need to address
these issues. Without cleansing politics of crime and corruption, without
ensuring a dignified environment for women, without genuine inner party
democracy you cannot attract large numbers of female political workers. In such
a situation, it is unrealistic to expect political parties to field enough
women candidates.
On The Plus Side
But the situation is not
all grim. The most hopeful aspect of Indian politics is that ordinary voters
are not at all averse to electing women or seeing them in positions of power.
The data from the very first election onward clearly shows that the success rate
of women candidates is far higher than that of male candidates. This indicates that
if a credible woman candidate appears on the scene, voters tend to prefer her
over men. Feminists keep crying discrimination. Yes, party bosses discriminate
against women but we should draw strength from the fact that voters are not
biased against women. If anything they show a distinct bias in favour of women.
Look at the way Indira Gandhi came to be lionized as Durga incarnate as she
grew more domineering. Her emergence as a political leader who created fear
among her male colleagues was celebrated, not ridiculed. She was admiringly
called "the only man" in her cabinet. Such a woman wouldn’t fare so
well in the West, or become a loved icon the way Indira became, till she turned
despotic and became marred with charges of corruption and nepotism. A
Durga-like woman does not easily get
such admiration among men in the West leave alone command reverence and awe.
But in India, all those women who assume the role of powerful matriarchs and
learn to command men, do very well. But those who keep whining about equality
or operate under male patronage don’t reach too far.
It’s to do with the all
pervasive mother complex in our society. Even grown up men are expected to and
are respected for being reverential towards their mothers. Unconditional
obedience to a mother's commands are held up as a cultural ideal. Such a man in
the West would be sent to a psychiatrist for Oedipal complex and treated as an
infantile creature. But in our culture, feminine as Shakti is treated as
worship worthy. Smart women use it well to their advantage.
It is not a coincidence
that all the powerful women politicians in recent decades have either been
single or widows. Mamata Banerjee and Mayawati never married. Sonia Gandhi came
into her own only after she became a widow.
Jayalalitha too acquired real clout and
aura only after MGR’s death. Sheila Dikshit
may have gained entry into politics as a daughter-in law –but she came to be
counted only after her husband and father-in law passed away.
On
the Women’s Reservation Bill
I
have serious reservations about the women’s reservation bill even though I do
wish to see serious enhancement in women’s participation in politics. The Bill
is highly flawed in its present form and needs serious reformulation. We had
presented an Alternative Bill which was adopted by the Election Commission of
India as a far more viable proposal. (for detail description http://manushi.in/articles.php?articleId=1100#.VQgPstKUeGN)
I
am of the firm belief that cleansing politics of crime and corruption of
eliminating the role of muscle is far more important at this point in time than
ensuring quotas for women. If women were
to lead the battle for far reaching political reforms and succeed in the task,
that will automatically create a respect worthy place for them in electoral
politics.
There
is no substitute for creating an independent political base through solid work.
Can the Quota Brigade claim in all honesty that they have done the required
ground work and are yet denied tickets?
Women weaken themselves by seeking patronized entry. That prevents the
emergence of an effective women’s lobby in our politics. They see each other as
competitors rather than comrades and colleagues. It is noteworthy that most women
leaders don’t get along with women within their own parties; instead of
promoting each other, they try and under cut each other. A Minakshi Lekhi would
see a Nirmala Sitharaman as a threatening rival rather than rejoice in the
other’s elevation. Likewise Jayanti Natarajan won’t be pleased at Ambika Soni’s
elevation. But they all play rhetorical tribute to women’s empowerment. Women
as a group remain weak because each one vies for male patronage rather than
bond with other women. In the West,
women gained strength as a group because they had to bond with each other in
the face of a hostile male dominated establishment. In India, women have
instead sought patronized entry which can help individual women but not women
as a group.
But
we must remember that women have made a mark for themselves in European
democracies mainly because the rules of the game were already relatively clean.
Take the case of Scandinavian countries where women have even crossed the 50%
mark without reserved seats. They could do so because there is genuine inner
party democracy with a high degree of transparency in their functioning. There women mobilized bottom up – starting
from neighborhood politics. That’s how they built a solid political base for
their participation. The trouble with my feminist sisters in India is that they
don’t want to start at mohalla level and fight municipal corporation elections.
They want to get MLA and MP tickets straight away simply because they come from
elite backgrounds, are articulate and have access to media. You can’t get your
due place in politics by going and shouting in TV studios, making statements in
press or raving and ranting against male politicians. If you want to be served parosi thali
by men, then you have to accept a secondary status.
For
all their rhetorical radicalism, the pro reservation lobby of feminists can’t
mobilize even 20,000 women to come and demonstrate in Delhi, leave alone
display a massive support base in the way a Mamata Banerjee or Narendra Modi
can do. That is why they are not taken
seriously.
First published in Parliamentarian, March 2015
Posted on March 17, 2015
.JPG)
