Tag:

equality

By राजेश ओ.पी.सिंह

विश्व में ज्ञान के स्तम्भ माने जाने वाले भारत रत्न बाबा साहब डॉ. भीम राव अंबेडकर को केवल दलितों के उद्धारक बता कर सर्वसमाज और महिलाओं को उनके जीवनपर्यंत दिए गए योगदान को सीमित किया जाता रहा है। परन्तु यदि हम उनके लिखे लेखों, भाषणों और जीवन में किए गए महान कार्यों और आंदोलनों को देखें तो पाएंगे कि बाबा साहब ने प्रत्येक भारतीय के उत्थान के लिए कार्य किया है और सबसे खास देश की आधी आबादी (महिलाओं) के उत्थान के लिए अनेकों महान कार्य और त्याग किए हैं।

बाबा साहब का मानना था कि महिलाओं के सहयोग के बिना कोई भी समाज या देश विकास नहीं कर सकता, इसलिए उन्होंने कहा भी था कि ” मैं प्रत्येक समाज की उन्नति को महिलाओं की उन्नति से मापता हूं”, अर्थात केवल वही समाज या देश विकास की ओर जा रहा है जहां पर महिलाओं का भी विकास एक साथ हो रहा है।

बाबा साहब जीवनपर्यंत महिलाओं के विकास लिए कार्य करते रहे जिनमें से कुछ प्रमुख कार्य इस प्रकार है,जिनका आज भी उतना ही महत्व है जितना उस दौर में था।

1. 20 मार्च 1927 को महाड़ के सार्वजनिक कुएं में से दलितों को पानी भरने के लिए सत्याग्रह किया और इसी दिन उन्होंने दलित महिलाओं को साफ सुथरी साड़ियां पहनने को कहा। बाबा साहब द्वारा पानी के लिए किया गया ये पहला सत्याग्रह का सबसे ज्यादा सम्बन्ध महिलाओं से ही था क्यूंकि महिलाएं ही घर में पानी लाने के लिए ज़िम्मेदार मानी जाती है, इसलिए अब दलित महिलाओं को पानी लाने के लिए दूर तक जाने की आवश्यकता नहीं रही।

2. हिन्दू धार्मिक ग्रंथ ‘ मनुस्मृति ‘ जो कि समाज में सभी प्रकार की असमानताओं का जनक है, मनुस्मृति के अनुसार प्रत्येक पति चाहे वह कितना भी कमज़ोर क्यों ना हो को अपनी पत्नी पर पूरा नियंत्रण रखना चाहिए, बचपन में अपने पिता, शादी के बाद अपने पति और वृद्ध अवस्था में अपने बेटों के नियंत्रण में रहना चाहिए, महिलाओं को संपति के अधिकार से वंचित रखा गया, सती और बाल विवाह जैसी कुरीतियों में झोंका गया, इसलिए बाबा साहब ने कहा कि जो कोई धार्मिक ग्रंथ असमानता के जनक है ,एक व्यक्ति को श्रेष्ठ और एक को हीन बताते हैं, जो सदियों से शोषण का आधार बने हुए हैं उन सभी ग्रंथों को जलाया जाना चाहिए तभी समाज में एकता और समानता स्थापित की जा सकेगी, इसलिए बाबा साहब ने 25 दिसंबर,1927 को समानता स्थापित करने के लिए ” मनुस्मृति” का दहन करके संदेश दिया कि हम ऐसे किसी भी धार्मिक ग्रंथ को नहीं मानते जो असमानता पैदा करते हैं। और मनुस्मृति में महिलाओं के लिए जो जो चीजें प्रतिबंधित थी वो वो सब बाबा साहब “भारतीय संविधान” और “हिन्दू कोड बिल” में लेके आए।

3. वर्ष 1928 में ही बाबा साहब “मैटरनिटी बेनिफिट बिल” बॉम्बे विधानपरिषद में लेके आए और कहा कि जब कोई महिला मां बनने के लिए छुट्टियों पर होती है तब भी उस महिला को उसकी तनख्वाह का कुछ ना कुछ हिस्सा दिया जाना चाहिए ताकि वो अपना ध्यान अच्छे से रख सके और उसे पैसों के लिए इधर उधर कोई सहारा ना देखना पड़े। बाबा साहब द्वारा रखे इस बिल को बॉम्बे विधानपरिषद ने 1929 में स्वीकृति प्रदान कर दी और आजादी के बाद इसी बिल को “मैटरनिटी बेनिफिट एक्ट 1961” के रूप में भारत के सभी राज्यों लागू किया।

4. भारतवर्ष में डॉ. अम्बेडकर पहले व्यक्ति थे जिन्होंने “एक समान कार्य के लिए एक समान वेतन” बिना किसी लिंग भेदभाव के लिए मांग रखी।

महिलाओं का एक लंबे समय से समान काम के लिए समान वेतन का संघर्ष विश्व भर में चल रहा था तभी बाबा साहब ने वायसरॉय की कार्यकारी परिषद में श्रम मंत्री रहते हुए औद्योगिक कामगारों के लिए भारत में इसकी मांग उठाई और जब इन्हें भारतीय संविधान लिखने का अवसर प्राप्त हुआ तो संविधान के अनुच्छेद 39(4) में उन्होंने इसकी संवैधानिक व्यवस्था की।

5. इसके साथ साथ आजादी मिलते ही संविधान में जब पुरुषों को मताधिकार मिला तो महिलाओं को भी मिला। अर्थात बिना किसी भेदभाव के सभी महिलाओं को पुरुषों के बराबर मत मिला। यदि हम देखें तो इंगलैंड जैसे विकसित देश में मताधिकर के लिए महिलाओं को लंबे संघर्षों और आंदोलनों से गुजरना पड़ा और तब जाकर 1928 में वहां की महिलाएं मत डालने के लिए योग्य हुई, ऐसे ही अमेरिका में 1920 और फ्रांस में महिलाओं को मताधिकार प्राप्त करने के लिए 1944 तक लम्बा इंतजार करना पड़ा। ये बाबा साहब ही थे जिन्होंने बिना किसी असमानता के तुरंत सभी महिलाओं को उनकी सामाजिक, आर्थिक ,राजनीतिक और शिक्षा आदि को एक तरफ रख कर सबसे पहले बराबर मताधिकार प्रदान किया।

6. बाबा साहब द्वारा महिलाओं के लिए किया गया सबसे बड़ा कार्य और त्याग “हिन्दू कोड बिल” था, बाबा साहब ने महिलाओं के उत्थान के लिए लगभग सभी प्रबंध भारतीय संविधान में कर दिए थे परन्तु जो कुछ रह गए थे और जिनका संबंध केवल महिलाओं से था को “हिन्दू कोड बिल” के माध्यम से पूरा करना चाहते थे। कानून मंत्री रहते हुए बाबा साहब ने हिन्दू कोड बिल का निर्माण किया जिसमें मुख्य रूप से महिलाओं को अपने पिता और पति की संपति में अधिकार दिए जाने का प्रावधान था, परंतु इस बिल को भारतीय संसद में रूढ़िवादी लोगों ने पास नहीं होने दिया और इस से बाबा साहब इतने आहत हुए कि उन्होंने मंत्री पद से इस्तीफा दे दिया। भारतीय इतिहास में ये केवल एकमात्र उदाहरण है जब किसी पुरुष मंत्री ने महिलाओं के उत्थान के लिए लाए गए बिल के पास ना होने कि वजह से इस्तीफा दे दिया हो, परंतु ये बात भारत की अधिकतर महिलाएं नहीं जानती कि उनके अधिकारों के लिए बाबा साहब ने अपना मंत्री पद तक त्याग दिया था। परन्तु अब धीरे धीरे इतने वर्षों में हिन्दू कोड बिल को अंशो अंशो में पास कर लिया गया है और ये बाबा साहब ही थे जिनकी बदौलत आज महिलाएं इन अधिकारों को प्राप्त कर पा रही है।

अंत में हम ये ही कहना चाहेंगे कि बाबा साहब ने अपने सम्पूर्ण जीवन का एक बड़ा हिस्सा केवल महिलाओं के उत्थान और उद्धार में लगाया परंतु भारतीय महिलाएं बाबा साहब के योगदानों से अनभिज्ञ (अनजान) है।

भारत में आज भी बाबा साहब को पढ़े और पढ़ाए जाने कि आवश्यकता है ताकि समाज में और महिलाओं में जागरूकता पैदा की जा सके और भारत को विकास के पथ पर अग्रसर किया जा सके।

0 comments 29 views
35 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

By सरला माहेश्वरी

हिजाब पहना तो मारेंगे
जींस पहना तो मारेंगे
बुर्का पहना तो मारेंगे
टाँगें दिखाई तो मारेंगे
घूँघट हटाया तो मारेंगे
बोली तो मारेंगे !
न बोली तो मारेंगे !

खिलखिलाई तो मारेंगे
मोबाइल रखा तो मारेंगे
प्रेम किया तो मारेंगे
नौकरी की तो मारेंगे
घर पर रही तो मारेंगे !
इस बहाने ! उस बहाने मारेंगे !
धर्म के नाम पर मारेंगे !
अधर्म के नाम पर मारेंगे !

तुम मारोगे जरूर
ढकूं या उघाड़ूँ कुछ भी
मेरे होने के लिए ही मारोगे
जनम के पहले ही मारोगे !

सच यह है कि तुम्हे
हमारा हिजाब भी डराता है ! हमारी जींस भी डराती है !
घूँघट उठाना भी डराता है ! हमारा बुर्का भी डराता है !
हमारा चुप रहना भी डराता है ! बोलना भी डराता है !
हमारा पढ़ना भी डराता है ! ना पढ़ना भी डराता है !
नौकरी करना भी डराता है ! और घर में रहना भी डराता है !
हमारा खिलखिलाना भी डराता है ! चुप रहना भी डराता है !
गोया हम इंसान नहीं मुट्ठी में बंद तुम्हारे डर का दूसरा नाम हैं !

पर वे दिन दूर नहीं जब
मार ! मार ! मार ! होगा पलटवार !
पलटवार !
खार ! खार ! खार ! ये मार ! वो मार !
ये मार ! वो मार !
तब लड़ाई बराबरी की होगी ! तब आएगा लड़ाई का मज़ा !!

अरे कायर पुरुष मत डर ! मत डर !
हम इंसान है ! मुट्ठी खोल हाथ मिला !
साथ चलकर तो देख ! अपने से निकल कर तो देख !
हमारी आँख से भी देख !
ज़िंदगी को फूलों की तरह महकते तो देख !

पागल ! नजरों को दो-चार करके तो देख !
अरे अभागे ! प्रेम करके तो देख !

0 comments 48 views
11 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Deeksha Tiwari

“A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.”
― Gloria Steinem

Feminism has been around for a while and it has significantly changed the blueprint of the world we live in. Throughout history, there have been several waves of feminism. The article deliberates on the possibility of a new wave that incorporates the best of both worlds : intersectionality and liberalism. 

 The movement began in the 1830s with the focal point being women’s suffrage. Women realised that in order to achieve equality they had to attain a certain amount of political power. This is widely known as the first wave of feminism. The highlight of the first wave was mainly that women received the right to vote.

The second wave began after World War II in the 1960s and lasted till the late 1980s.. Feminists now shifted their focus to sexual and reproductive rights. They fought for autonomy over their bodies and abortion rights and helped in legalising contraception. The second wave also focused on workplace and wage inequality. 

The third wave which began in the early to mid 1990s was headed by women who already had the rights that the previous waves granted them and now wanted it all. They identified the legacy of their predecessors but were also quick in criticizing them and pointing out their limitations. The movement began to radicalize and diversify and spread into mainstream media and pop culture. Women started to reclaim slurs like ‘slut’ and this led to the inception of slutwalks. 

While there are many schools of thought and waves, the core belief of feminism is that women should not be treated as second grade citizens when compared to their male counterparts. Postmodern feminism has reinvented itself into a fourth wave of intersectionality or intersectional feminism- a theory of social justice and feminism that tries to understand inequality and oppression through a multi-dimensional lens.

Civil rights activist Kimberlé Crenshaw has stated on multiple occasions that if we aren’t intersectional, the most vulnerable of the lot are going to fall through the cracks.

In critical theories, intersectionality is a notion used to characterise the ways in which oppressive institutions (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, xenophobia, classism, etc.) are intertwined and cannot be independently investigated. Intersectional feminism recognises that no individual or identity exists in a vacuum and our individual socio-cultural backgrounds affect the way things like laws and policies affect us. 

When translated into Indian context, it means that Muslim women suffering from the consequences of bigamy, or economically underprivileged women without access to sanitary pads, suffer far more than majority-class women residing in upscale neighbourhoods of metropolitan cities. Second, and maybe more importantly, the evil of caste enters the picture as well. Women from Dalit bahujan communities are oppressed on three levels by men from their own communities, savarna men, and savarna women.

With a simultaneous rise of the liberal feminism movement, many question whether its principles even adhere remotely with the principles of intersectional feminism. While some argue that a fifth wave is on its way, and the two do not gel together, I believe there is more in common than what is apparent. 

Bigotry is possibly the most blatant breach of individualism. So, it is only natural that the first thing that comes to mind when we think of both the movements, is the common condemnation for it. The very core of the liberal feminist movement is the celebration and protection of individuality and a demand for minimum government interference in the process. Ultimately, it is this very belief in individualism that contributes to the dismissal of the idea of gender roles or any other stereotype that restricts individual choice. This involves racial, cultural, and sexual stereotypes and other community stereotypes of individuals. The focus on individuality rather than collectivism makes sure that no individual or minority “falls through the cracks”. 

Jacob Levy draws a one of a kind parallel between the two movements in his essay. He argues that intersectionality is important to explain how a policy or social order can harm individuals defined by their intersectional identities more than those who are not defined by such an intersection. 

Intersectionality only broadens the libertarian outlook further and gives tremendous insights into issues that otherwise tend to be overlooked. For instance, when advocating for open borders, most liberals often focus on the loss of employment caused by closed borders; the theory of intersectionality, on the other hand, focuses on how limits on migration impact doubly marginal groups, such as women of colour. Not only are women of colour deprived of economic opportunities, but they are also left with the strenuous task of raising children with little to no money on their own when it is difficult for a father to be with his family due to migration restrictions. 

A combination of these two, can help resolve the loopholes that exist currently. If there is to be a new wave, it must combine the best of both the worlds. The liberal theory’s regard of individualism and disregard of government oppression and intersectionality’s indispensable insight into the complex structure of various cultures and societies and the multiple levels and layers of oppression; when placed together, give rise to a refined lens to investigate patriarchal oppression. 

Movements are made of people. People have biases. The need of the hour is to unlearn them and I believe intersectionality provides us with the means of doing the same. Feminism still remains restricted to women with unlimited access to resources like the Internet, a free and equitable judicial system, and social aid. It continues to be just another ambiguous and incomprehensible word for women who are either forced to drop out of school to be married off or women who are not allowed to pursue education in the first place. No movement can be completely successful until every individual, even the most oppressed, is liberated. It is like Audre Lorde said, “I am not free while any woman is unfree, even when her shackles are very different from my own”. 

Deeksha Tiwari is currently pursuing her degree in law at NMIMS School of Law, Navi Mumbai. She is a part of Students for Liberty’s first cohort of Fellowship for Freedom in India.

0 comments 23 views
5 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Judith Sargent Stevens Murray (May 1, 1751 – June 9, 1820) was an early American advocate for women’s rights, an essay writer, playwright, poet, and letter writer. She was one of the first American proponents of the idea of the equality of the sexes—that women, like men, had the capability of intellectual accomplishment and should be able to achieve economic independence. Among many other influential pieces, her landmark essay “On the Equality of the Sexes” paved the way for new thoughts and ideas proposed by other feminist writers of the century.

According to Judith Sargent Stevens Murray, if women seemed inequal or incapable when compared to men, it was entirely due to the fact that women lacked the right to education and nothing else.

Murray argues against the idea that women are not mentally equal to men in all areas. She notes that the “province of imagination hath long since been surrendered to us”, but that women are extremely limited in how they exercise their imaginations. She scornfully points out that women have channeled this creativity into fashion, slander, and gossip to incredibly skilled ends, but stresses that she is not pointing this out in order to “furnish these facts as instances of excellency in our sex” but to be used as “proofs of a creative faculty, of a lively imagination”. Murray then states that traditional female activities like sewing and cooking will not bring out women’s creativity and intellects to their fullest potential, as she views these as activities that do not require much thought or attention, and that women cannot fulfill that potential if other avenues of expression and learning are denied to them.

She argues that if the woman was given the ability to accompany her brother in his studies, the woman could have excelled in subjects like astronomy and geography that could have made her better able to appreciate Jehovah. This would have the benefit of not only discouraging her from idle, destructive pastimes but to also encourage her to come up with ideas that could greatly benefit mankind and to foster stronger friendships and marriages. This does not mean that women cannot or would not take care of activities such as cooking or sewing, but that this will give them the liberty to reflect upon their education and come up with positive ideas as opposed to negative ones. Murray then poses that some would state that women only need to take care of domestic duties, only for her to argue that this idea is degrading, as women would thus be forbidden from contemplating anything more complicated than “the mechanism of a pudding, or the sewing the seams of a garment”.

She further supports her argument by comparing and contrasting two two year old siblings, one male and one female.

“Will it be said that the judgment of a male of two years old, is more sage than that of a female’s of the same age? I believe the reverse is generally observed to be true. But from that period what partiality! how is the one exalted, and the other depressed, by the contrary modes of education which are adopted! the one is taught to aspire, and the other is early confined and limited. As their years increase, the sister must be wholly domesticated, while the brother is led by the hand through all the flowery paths of science.”

Murray empahizes that the souls of women are equal to that of man and that there have been women throughout history that have shown that they can be man’s equals. She further notes that some naysayers have argued for the mental superiority of man because they are also physically stronger, but that this concept is faulty for several reasons. Not only are many animals that are stronger than men, but that there are also effeminate men and robust women. She further comments that even if “animal strength proved any thing”, that it is possible for women to have been given the ability to have superior minds to make up for this imbalance. However, Murray stresses that she is only mentioning this possibility because she wants to be equal, not because she wants one sex to be superior over the other.

Murray acknowledges that there are passages in the Bible that could be used to back up the argument of male superiority, but that she considers these passages to be metaphors and not fact. She also points out several examples of biblical men that were imperfect, such as Job cursing against God, which she feels invalidates the idea of using the Bible to support male superiority. Murray restates that women should be allowed equal access to education, as this would prevent women from seeing men as adversaries and would discourage issues that would arise from this line of thought.

At a time when the American Constitution was being drafted and the fate of women was being decided, predominantly by men, it was noteworthy that one woman was arguing vehemently for the equality of the sexes.

0 comments 35 views
3 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Womb - Encouraging, Empowering and Celebrating Women.

The Womb is an e-platform to bring together a community of people who are passionate about women rights and gender justice. It hopes to create space for women issues in the media which are oft neglected and mostly negative. For our boys and girls to grow up in a world where everyone has equal opportunity irrespective of gender, it is important to create this space for women issues and women stories, to offset the patriarchal tilt in our mainstream media and society.

@2025 – The Womb. All Rights Reserved. Designed and Developed by The Womb Team

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?