| If you know anything about marine sexual dimorphism (visible physical differences between genders in the same species), you know that in fish (and spiders), the female of the species is always larger. Now, if you're a fan of Hemingway, re-read TOMATS, substituting "she" for "he", and see what you think. |
| Sexual dimorphism among primates manifests in the opposite way. Apart from obvious differences in shape, men are usually taller than women from the same gene-pool. These differences have arisen from differences in biological functions "" the ones they refuse to discuss in state-run Indian schools. |
| Nobody disputes that men and women are different biologically. They are possibly different in intellectual function as well "" though this is an explosively controversial assertion. Harvard's former president, Larry Summers, became "former" for saying this. |
| His point: women map as "more normal" on the IQ bell-curve with fewer women outliers in either direction. The politically incorrect but mathematically correct interpretation is that there are fewer female imbeciles and also, fewer women geniuses. On average though, men and women score at the same IQ levels. |
| Do the differences mean that the genders should be treated differently in law? Every year, the advent of International Women's Day (IWD), March 8, leads to another set of debates. |
| Every stable society has its own answers. Patriarchal ones say "Yes, and men should be in charge" and rationalise that through references to religion, cultural taboos and what-have-you. |
| Progressive societies also say "Yes, there should be discrimination" but this time the treatment is skewed in favour of women via affirmative action. For example, there are job quotas for women and maternity leave. |
| There are, in practice, very few places where women are treated equal. Some professions are male bastions. Israel, for instance, has universal conscription but women are not put in fighting units. There are few women stevedores and fewer CEOs. Pay-scales are skewed in favour of men "" even in journalism where gender ratios aren't biased. |
| India presents a very grey-scaled picture on this front. India had a woman prime minister and women Supreme Court lawyers and judges long before most of the world. It also has high levels of domestic abuse and dowry-deaths. And of course, there are female infanticide and gender-biased abortions. |
| The state policy is affirmative action. It's easier for a woman entrepreneur to get loans. Tax laws offer greater relief. There are more incentives for women students. A women senior citizen enrolled in college gets a 75 per cent discount on rail travel whereas a man in a similar situation gets only 35 per cent discount. |
| In terms of other laws as well, women have it better. Be it provisions relating to workplace sexual harassment, or domestic and marital abuse, or child-custody in divorce, the laws tend to favour women. So much so, there's been a backlash from men who claim their wives have blackmailed them by using the provisions of these acts. |
| Nevertheless, women remain clearly second in social-economic terms. There's low representation in boardrooms and low representation in Parliament and most women MPs and CEOs got there through inheritance. Where women do earn good money, their spouses and male guardians have a large say in how they dispose it of. |
| Would reservations for Lok Sabha seats really change this? I doubt it. Something more sweeping and fundamental is required. I would suggest banning rotis as staple diet. Working women eat rice because cooking rice is low-maintenance while rolling rotis is slave labour. |
| Freed from their rolling-pins, women could devote more time to earning better money, which would in time translate into better treatment. Of course, it would be difficult to implement this ban. But perhaps it is no more difficult to change dietary habits than it is to change ingrained gender attitudes. |
Top Section
Explore Business Standard