Politics is male fiefdom-women need a capstan to sail in the deep water of politics. Will the status change or it'll go like that unabated?

     It is an agony and irony of our time that women are treated just as a clog in the machine of family and society not the essential part of it, let this concept of inequality put on hold for the sake of discussion, for the time being and discuss the matter of women  in larger prospective. It is extremely derogatory and insulting for the women and glaring to note that in the end of first quarter of 21st century., women are treated as if subjugate not equal. It is more degusting when it is heard from the mouth of a lawmaker that they are worthless and incapable to pull the exigencies of politics even if they come from the established political family. Recently a strange and misogynistic statement appeared in the columns of newspapers and  broadcasted on electronic news media that women are not capable to spearhead the political legacy. Perpetuator of this distasteful and anti women statement was not an ordinary man but a four time elected member of parliament from Hisar and had been an MLA of state assembly on three occasions, Sh. Jai Prakash aka JP.  He considers himself a great political strategist and claims to know the pulse of  electorates. The comment was made by him against Smt. Kiran Chaudhary, a four time MLA from Haryana and once in Delhi and her daughter who is a daughter of tall political leader of Haryana till his death in a plane crash, Sh. Surender Singh and grand daughter of Sh. Bansi Lal, the third Chief Minister of Haryana and considered as architect of modern Haryana. 

    Making a political statement is the right of any politician or even of an ordinary national. Freedom of speech is guaranteed in the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution of India. Moreover, to make a point out of incidents happening around is expected from an MLA or MP. Making a reference to an incident of change or switch over of a fellow political leader to some other political party with vested interest and political gain is genuine and worth criticism. In fact, its not the first incident, every now and then, political leaders cross over to other political dispensation, sometime by their own sweet will for their own gain or compelled by the rival ruling party to cross over for the political and tactical move of that party and now it has become a norm of the today's political scenario. The MP throwing a salvo against his opponent has crossed over many a time through defection. It is a common belief of the most of  ordinary people of Haryana including his supporters that he can do anything for the maintenance of his political existence and for retaining political ground. The political environment of India today has reached at the lowest ebb where people forgotten  to notice who is in which political party because bourgeoise political parties have lost the ideological distinction. A new term has been coined to justify their disdain philosophy 'home coming' . It is beyond understanding for what this hue and cry.

    But the comment of Sh. Jai Prakash, recently elected MP from Hisar fourth time that 'political legacy of Bansi Lal can't be sustained by women in our patriarchal society where women are not considered heir'. The comment is highly objectionable and obnoxious, against the dignity and self-esteem of women, disgraceful and disrespectful for the women at large. It is the reflex of skewed, feudalistic and patriarchal mindset to favour the males in society and in particular of political arena and a deliberate and conscious outburst to put the women and girls at the lowest pedestal of social hierarchy. It can't restricted merely a political statement. It is the orchestrated and  well thought discourse of a section of political leadership across the political spectrum of today's. It's the reflection of male psych to preserve the order of male dominance in every sphere and walk of life.  

    It is a blatant tendency to revert the gains of women's emancipation, multifaceted journey, spanning at least two centuries to bring social, cultural and political changes. This mindset is the negation of  social, educational and legislation  reforms perpetuated by social reformist like Mahatma Phule, Raja Ram Mohan rai, Ishwar Chander Vidyasagar etc. for the change and improve the status of women in Indian Society. Women's participation in freedom struggle was encouraged and assimilated by the leaders acknowledging the fact that women constitute the half of the society. Leaders like Sarojini Naidu, Kasturba Gandhi, Kamladevi Chatopadhyay were actively involved in freedom struggle. Durga Bhabhi was an integral part of the Indian Independence Movement spearheaded by Bhagat Singh who played a significant role for the escape of Bhagat Singh from Amritsar in 1919. For involving in decision making and to enhance political participation in local bodies, 73rd and 74th amendment was made in constitution. A piquant demand is constantly and consistently raised to extend the reservation of seats for women in legislatures. 

    India has witnessed the great women politician such as Sarojini Naidu, Sucheta Kriplani, Vijaya Laxmi Pandit, Aruna Asif Ali, Indira Gandhi, J. Jailalitha, Mamta Banerjee, Sonia Gandhi, Pratibha Patil, Sushma Swaraj, Brida Karat,to name a few and numerous others. The representation of women in parliament and state assemblies dwindle between 10-15% and not more than 20% at anytime. The lesser representation of women in legislatures is the outcome of lesser opportunities provided to women to contest the elections. The Indian parliamentary system  and societal mindset is  attuned in such a manner that women can't participate in the political decision making. 

    As of today, out of 195 counties of world, only 27 countries where women serve as Heads of State and/or Government. Just 18 countries have a woman Head of State, and 15 countries have a woman Head of Government. Only 26.9 per cent of parliamentarians in single or lower houses are women, up from 11 per cent in 1995. Only six countries have 50 per cent or more women in parliament in single or lower houses: Rwanda (61 per cent), Cuba (56 per cent), Nicaragua (54 per cent), Andorra (50 per cent), Mexico (50 per cent), New Zealand (50 per cent), and the United Arab Emirates (50 per cent). Women hold 36 per cent of parliamentary seats in Latin America and the Caribbean and make up 33 per cent of parliamentarians in Europe and Northern America. In sub-Saharan Africa, there are 27 per cent of women legislators, followed by Eastern and South-Eastern Asia with 23 per cent, Oceania with 20 per cent, Central and Southern Asia and Northern Africa and Western Asia where, in both regions, women make up 18 per cent of women Members of Parliament.

    As per a UN report, women represent 23.3 per cent of Cabinet members heading Ministries, leading a policy area.  There are only 15 countries in which women hold 50 per cent or more of the positions of Cabinet Ministers leading policy areas. The five most commonly held portfolios by women Cabinet Ministers are Women and gender equality, followed by Family and children affairs, Social inclusion and development, Social protection and social security, and Indigenous and minority affairs.

    In recent concluded elections in India, the number of women contesting general elections has increased from 2.9 per cent in 1957 to nearly 10 per cent in 2024.This marked a steady increase from previous elections, 7 per cent in 2009, 8 per cent in 2014, and 9 per cent in 2019. The success rate of women contestants has varied over the decades. The 18th Lok Sabha (2024) had 74 women elected MPs in Lok Sabha which is over 13.62 per cent of the lower house. although strength marginal dropped from the 17th Lok Sabha, which had the highest female representation at over 14 per cent.

    It is apparent that most of the representation of the  females in parliament, particularly in Lok Sabha is of political lineage or purported by established political families and a select few represents the tinsel world. Ordinary Indian has a remote chance to enter the parliament or state legislature, what to say of women against whom citadel of second fiddle has been erected.  The perpetuation and spearhead of a campaign against women by the politician like Jai Prakash will have a cascading effect. This time it happened in public but it is continuing  unabated in the hindsight in the social milieu. The more distressing is to note that no leader of a stature of big political parties come forward to condemn the malicious and undignified posture taken by an elected representative of one of the biggest and oldest party which has elected 5 women presidents  in Annie Besant, Sarojini Naidu, Nellie Sengupta, Indira Gandhi (twice) and Sonia Gandhi (for 20 long years). 

    It seems that political will to emancipate the women from the cudgel of feudalistic and regressive traditional approach which exist in the form of patriarchal mindset is lacking or just for the lip service to garner the votes. Women are not the living entity but the things, they are not the partner for making progress and advancement of the society but simply a partner in sharing bed and produce the children preferably male to run the ancestry of family and pseudo pride, women can not be considered as torch bearer of their family in general and political family in particular. It is just not a political statement but a skewed mindset against the women and girls to show them their real place in today's Haryana in particular and India in general. No voice of dissent is the testimony of it. Is this was the vision of Indian constitution and democracy!

        What B. R. Ambedkar observed and wished for the women is still a distant dream in the field of women emancipation who emphatically said while putting the Hindu Code Bill on the table of parliament for discussion "I measure the progress of community by the degree of progress which women have achieved."