How long are we going to continue with these spineless noncommittal speeches merely camouflaging the issue with pseudo-sentimentality?
A FRANCIS OFM
As usual at election rallies and on International Women’s Day, we are bombarded with an onslaught of speeches and write-ups on the theme of gender equality. Ironically, for most politicians and male speakers with allegiance to patriarchy, the conversation about gender equality means nothing more than the repetition of a recorded speech, which they have spoken or written previously, focusing around the theme of bridging the gender gap. With no substantive commitment, what so ever, to whatever they say, as it lacks the bigger picture of the matter both in their own capacity for comprehension and in their speeches as well, they may at the most stretch themselves up to piggy-backing some cross references about the atrocities on women. In this vein it is also noticeable that the members of the ruling party conveniently turn a blind eye to the barrage of atrocities targeted on women particularly, in their respective constituencies, states and the country.
Noncommittal Talks with PseudoSentimentality Is the issue of gender equality exclusively about bridging the gender gap? Is that the long and short, at the heart of it? The recent hype from some vested political quarters over the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) data that India now has 1020 female for every 1000 male resoundingly demonstrated somewhat a similar tone and message. Or at least, I feel it that way! For some reason these individuals who hold their own gender biases conveniently overlooked the limitation of this survey. According to the BBC report, the survey only covered 630,000 of India’s 300 million household. A general rule of thumb in any research study is that the findings from a controlled sample needn’t necessarily reflect the findings on the entire group! A similar storm of hype was also generated previously, subsequent to the 2019 elections. Although the women representation in the parliament is appallingly below 15%, this sect of politicians and the media with their vested interest of patriarchy hailed that it was a great sign of change. By the way, the bill regarding the 33% of women representation in the parliament continues to remain a pipe dream, even after twenty-five years! How long are we going to continue with these spineless noncommittal speeches which instead of capturing the crux of the matter, merely camouflage the issue with pseudo sentimentality? The bottom line here is the stark truth which nobody can deny.
And that is, in words we uphold the middle space of complementarity of women as symmetrical with men, indicating that both genders are entitled to equal rights, but in action there is a huge polarised hierarchical space, an ‘uncrossable chasm’ between men and women. The Implicit Bias of ‘Male Preference’ Traditionally, the role of man is endorsed with the right to make decisions at home and be the leader of his family. This is so deeply ingrained in our collective DNA as well, that in the arena of our societal living we unconsciously showcase the preference for male over female when it comes to hand-picking a leader. Imagine for ourselves for a moment, what is the picture that spontaneously comes to our minds when we hear the words, “a homemaking parent” or the words, “a working parent”? Truth be said that most of us identify the ‘homemaking parent’ with the female parent, the mother and the ‘working parent’ with the male parent, the father. Why don’t we think the other way around, the father as the homemaking parent and the mother as the working parent? These kinds of biases are not just sheltered exclusively in the minds of men, but in women too, and these are the taproot for all kinds of gender inequalities that thrive in men and women. ‘Men are the confident leaders’, is a common bias that got circulated from time immemorial.
There have been many proven research data out there that when the credentials, talents and leadership qualities of two individuals submitted without any gender details, the selecting body, with a least trace of prejudice and doubt, chooses the most deserving candidate. But when the same candidates are presented with their gender identities, the selecting body exclusively prefers the male candidate over the female. This is because the bias of ‘male preference’ over female is so deep rooted in us and we seldom dare to walk outside the box of our gender biases. It is time we went after these abysmally deep-seated biases and jettisoned them once and forever. Starting from Our Biological Roots Janet Crawford, a female scientist and an ardent advocate for the application of neuroscience research to corporate functioning, advices that going after our biological roots of gender biases needs to be the starting point in our conversation on tackling gender issues. Both men and women carry multitude of indelibly ingrained gender biases. Start from here, the very place of our biases! It is from there the brain gathers the individual’s learned patterns of ideas and beliefs and makes the grist for the mill of our daily interactions. As a man, starting from this point would mean that I check my male chauvinistic biases that stay implicit and hidden, uncover them.
It is painful but worth working on them because it will broaden my understanding of women as symmetrically equal to me, and are entitled to have the same rights as I have, as a human person. This cannot however, come true easily, and overnight. We all need help with it because, as Maureen Fitzgerald puts it rightly, “We are just casualties of our limited thinking.” One of the great tools that Harvard scholars developed in collaboration with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) is the ‘Implicit Association Test’ (IAT) which helps people to bring to light their implicit gender biases. By all means, its worth taking this test if we are committed to gender equality and starting at the right place in dealing with gender issues. A greater and promising help we could offer to our younger ones is that an antigender bias education programme be advocated in their school curriculum, which will provide them with the needed training and skills in creating appropriate mental associations about complementary roles of men, women and other non-confirming genders
∎
