The myth of the male superiority
APROPOS of Aruti Nayar’s "Silent genocide" (May 6), it is shameful for a society that despite the rhetoric about empowerment of women and improving their status, women are recklessly subjected to ‘sex selective’ abortions. Inspite of spread of education and growth in science and technology, we remain orthodox with our faith in male-superiority as strong as ever.
But more shocking is the attitude of our so-called modern educated women, who often espouse the cause of feminism. Even such women choose to abort a female child and pretend that they are exercising their right over their own body. The major cause of the present lop-sided gender bias and a preference for the male child is our lack of psychological awakening through education.
Equal treatment of the girl-child should be a social reality and cannot be imposed by the law. It is futile to clamour for reserving seats for women in our Parliament, when we cannot ensure the girl child a secure existence in the womb of her own mother.
Despite an Act of the Parliament why has the practice of female foeticide remained unchecked? It is because a law is practically of no worth unless it conforms to social practice?
Despite economic and technological changes and emancipation of women, women are still treated consciously or sub-consciously, as property, sometimes valuable, often not. Here the patriarchal system in a crude and violent form still predominates.
The belief in male superiority is so internalised in our psyche that despite sincere efforts by various social groups, including women organisation, this thinking has not changed. This is why there has been no slackening in the practice of female foeticide. Until and unless the society as a whole does not respect women and acknowledge their contribution, nothing is going to change.
The practice of female foeticide has become widespread. The Vedas, the code of Manu and even Muslim clerics are responsible for such a situation.
That the patriarch society fosters a social bias against the female and in favour of the male, is but natural. No religion has fought this evil. Despite their feminist pretentions, women are equally responsible for this sorry state of affairs. The demand for reservation for women in the Parliament appears to be a farce in the context of the the growing evil of female foeticide.
HANS RAJ JAIN
Apropos of Dr B.K. Sharma’s article "Bitter truths about sweet killer" (May 6), diabetics must learn to live with this disease. He must know the pitfalls and how to avoid them. A diabetic, who is overweight, should try to reduce his weight by gradually reducing his dietary intake and exercising.
A diabetic patient must realise that there is no simple solution to his problem. He must learn to regulate his diet. He cannot afford to take any chances.
This is with reference to "Internalising belief in male superiority" by Nanki Hans (May 6). The example cited by the writer of a woman who was touched by the tenth Guru with a bow and told to serve the sangat in her next birth in order to redeem herself as she was the queen of Aurangzeb in her previous birth, is based on fiction and not on facts. This incident is not corroborated by a reliable historical source. According to the writer, female infanticide at that time was not practised. However, the practice of female infanticide was prevalent on large scale even in those days and the Great Guru issued edicts even against the most respectable families which practised female infanticide.
The Great Guru allowed people of all religions to join the sacred sangat, irrespective of their gender and he treated both genders on a par.