The idea of reservation itself is a backhanded compliment - it invokes pity, fractures self-respect, excuses and even celebrates mediocrity. It's as good as saying: "You have the brains of a cabbage, so here let me help you with a handicap." Reservation promotes divisive splinter groups that suddenly find legal sanction to placard and picket hysterically at the slightest hint of perceived injury to their new-found rights - exactly contrary to what it purports to do: promote inclusiveness.
Beyond all this, as a policy reservation has failed miserably - whether on class, caste, or religious lines. Till date there has not been a single well-researched data-proven study to show that reservation has benefited those it championed to benefit. There is ample evidence to the contrary - the policy of reservation has been abused by those who are in a position to manipulate the system (integrity is a burden in Indian politics). In the bargain, we've shortchanged the deserving and given merit a long unpaid vacation.
So why would reservation based on gender be any different? We have a penchant to scale failed policies, so we can fail even more spectacularly. The argument that we need more women in politics to address "women's issues" is ludicrous. Society's problems are gender neutral. Women and men are part of the same society. There are no "women's issues" and "men's issues" - they're simply issues because they affect everybody. Dowry deaths and exploitation and domestic abuse are society's problems, not women's. So are malnutrition, unemployment, and crime. We need academically qualified, ethically upright, and legally literate elected representatives - men and/or women - to address society's problems. It's counterproductive to label and compartmentalize society's ills because it sanctions some sections to throw up their hands and completely disengage from "your problem, not mine."
It could also set a dangerous precedent: Why stop with women's issues? Why not, say, beggars' rights? Or the rights of stand-up comics? Or jay walkers? Or dwarfs? Or door-to-door sales people? Are we going to allow each group to send a representative to the State Assembly or the Parliament? What has prevented the existing women parliamentarians
(who're shrilly out of control on national television at regular intervals) from framing sensible and sensitive policies for Indian citizens? If they couldn't or didn't all these years, what is going to change with this Bill?
The Bill is historic in one sense at least - though it's only got one foot in the door since the Lower House is yet to pass the Bill, it got the right (Ms. Swaraj and Co.) and the left (Ms. Karat and Co.) to hold hands and dance. Wow!...or whatever...
