I learnt a couple of days back that the Mumbai High Court has asked the Womanist Organization of India (WOI) to prove that men and women are equal. Apparently according to Maharashtra law, women cannot work in shops and bars after 9:30 pm and the WOI says that this is discriminatory and prevents women from obtaining employment on the same footing as men.
The Senior inspector of Police has told the court that waitresses and singers “can never be equated with women in other fields.” He’s also said that these women can be exploited and this goes against public interest and society (he forgot to mention the women in question though.) Now here’s the interesting bit: The court has asked WOI to “provide documentary evidence” that men and women are equal.
This is very unusual. The organization will of course have to decide which aspect of “equality” it wants to prove. Women and men are of course not equal in everything. Physically for example. Even in non discriminatory physical sports, men and women tournaments have different rules. Like tennis for example. But in my view, the particular sort of “equality” in this case is the right to opportunity. The law effectively says that women cannot be offered the same opportunities that men are offered and are thus placed at a disadvantage.
Also, the inspector’s comment is outrageous. What the hell does he mean by saying that waitresses and singers “can never be equated with women in other fields?” Are they some inferior sort of women? In what way? Do they deserve less dignity? And who is he to decide? In my opinion, he has to provide documentary evidence that they are not the same. The burden of proof is his.
It’s also an insult to women in that it implies that they can’t take care of themselves. We’re talking about adults here and no one is forcing a woman to work after 9:30 pm if she doesn’t want to. If it’s risky, then as an adult she has to make the decision as to whether or not she wants to go ahead. This is like the health department making a law saying “you cannot touch fire. It’s risky.” We already know that and can take care of ourselves thank you very much. And of course, we’re back to the old inanity of “public morality” which was touted during the hearings for the reading down of Article 377.
As usual, I had a devil of a time trying to find the case on the Mumbai High Court’s website – mainly because you have to search with exactly the right parameters and they’re so many of them. But I managed to at last. Here’s the screenshot of the case (Click to Enlarge):
The case will next be taken up on the 16th of October 2009. At least I think it is. The official listing says 16/10/2008 which I presume is some sort of typo. Here it is:
Am I happy that the court has asked the WOI to prove that men and women are equal (In whatever sense of the word)? Yes and no. Yes because once the concept is proved in court, it’s set down in black and white for all time and can be quoted in every case from this case forth without further argument. It will help expedite the removal of many more discriminatory laws. No because it seems that the right to equal opportunity is obvious and the court needn’t ask for it to be proved.
Unfortunately, “equality” isn’t something that is taken for granted in Indian society. Look how much Naz had to fight for the decriminalization of homosexuality when it should have been obvious. It’s possible that the court is trying to cover it’s tracks by being impartial and taking up the case from first principles to create an unassailable position. If so, then it’s the right thing to do. I hope it’s not because the Judges are prejudiced and have decided to try and make a fool of WOI and brand them a nuisance. But given the high credentials of our High Courts in general and looking at historical evidence, I’m inclined to think the best of them.
I’ll keep you guys updated on this case as and when court proceedings take place – and if they get delayed to a future date, I’ll post a brief note for that as well so you won’t be left hanging.
What do you think about this issue? Take the Poll:
[poll id=”7″]
The concept of equality is traditionally understood to mean "the right to be equal to men". This becomes problematic when it is extended to the understanding that women must be treated exactly like men if they are to gain equality with men. It implies that women must be treated according to male standards, obscuring the ways in which women are different from men and how they will be disadvantaged because of these differences.