It seems Ranju Radha is unaware of the provisions of the WRB. It does
already have provision for 33% quota to apply for the already existing quota
for SC/STs. So SC/ST women will automatically get more seats (at least 40)
in Parliament if the WRB is passed.
I feel that we should call the bluff of Mulayam Laloo and even Congress and
say: include a quota for OBCs and minorities to address any genuine
misgivings about the lack of representation of these sections - but we will
not allow the WRB to be indefinitely stalled or diluted on this pretext.

On 1 April 2010 09:48, ranju radha <[email protected]> wrote:

> "First of all, the SC and ST will automatically have their quota (of
> reservation) within (women's) quota."
>
>
> How come? unless u make provisions within it? why are u scared of giving
> space to Dalit/obc/minority/adivasi women?
>
> What make one ignore the issue representation of Dalit/adivasi/minority
> women?
> shear casteism. nothing else
> one should have atleast the openness shown by mulayam?
> it s shame that these "upper" caste feminists and politicians do not
> possess it
> tragedy !
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Sukla Sen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The "demand" for sub-quota, by no stretch, is a "demand". It's just an
>> alibi. A pure and simple "alibi" to block women's reservation.
>> First of all, the SC and ST will automatically have their quota (of
>> reservation) within (women's) quota. to ask for it is a mere act of
>> deception.
>> There is no such reservation for OBCs or Muslims in state or central
>> legislatures, so there will be none here either. Till some other amendments
>> are made.
>>
>> These selfsame worthies, it is pertinent to note, had no problem with
>> women's reservation in Panchayats. Because these are too insignificant from
>> their point of view.
>> Nor they are known to ever have raised any women's issues other than this.
>>
>> Sukla
>>
>> On 31 March 2010 18:38, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Ram,
>>> Am rather surprised to see this posting by you, that too asking for
>>> endorsement. I thought there had been a meeting by WRAG etc at the Press
>>> club and sub reservation had been rejected. Which Muslim women's groups (or
>>> other women's groups have you consulted before asking for endorsement?
>>> Please do let me know. (Though I have refused to be a vociferous advocate of
>>> the Women's legislative bodies reservation bill, the goings on in parliament
>>> and the SP leader's absurd behaviour and statements have really offended
>>> many of us.)
>>> This statement makes a point about Dalit reservation being implemented in
>>> Muslim majority areas. Why raise it in relation to the bill for women's
>>> reservation? And why does a what sounds like a mainly Muslim male group of
>>> upper or middle class professionals (never mind if some women are there too)
>>> speak on behalf of other minorities? Which other minority women or women's
>>> groups have they consulted? I ask because I have not heard of any such
>>> demand from any Christian women's groups for example. If you have, please do
>>> let me know.
>>> �with warm regards,
>>> Ammu Abraham
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: ram puniyani <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:08 pm
>>> Subject: [indiathinkersnet] Women's Reservation Bill- Reservation
>>> forDalit/OBC/Minority women- pl endorse
>>> To: Ram R Puniyani <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> > Striving for Muslim Empowerment
>>> > Association of Muslim Professionals
>>> > 68/69 Umar Manzil, 5th Road, Khar (West), Mumbai 400052
>>> > www.ampindia.org �
>>> > [email protected]
>>> >
>>> > Women's Reservation Bill: Seeking Muslim Representation
>>> > Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP), a not for profit, non-
>>> > political and non-sectarian organization, endeavours to promote
>>> > social welfare, community spirit, and economic prosperity through
>>> > education and knowledge augmentation, in the society. AMP had
>>> > taken the initiative to provide an unbiased platform, where people
>>> > were invited to come and share their opinion on the Women's
>>> > Reservation Bill, which was recently passed in the Rajya Sabha,
>>> > and will be introduced to the Lok Sabha, very soon. AMP had
>>> > conducted discussions and debates on this Bill at various places
>>> > in Mumbai, and other cities across the country, and based on
>>> > conclusions reached, and feedback from various luminaries,
>>> > intellectuals, and the general masses AMP presents its stand as
>>> > follows:
>>> > 1. The proposed legislation to reserve 33% percent seats in
>>> > Parliament, and State Legislatures for women which was first
>>> > introduced in the Lok Sabha on September 12, 1996 would only help
>>> > women of the elitist groups to gain seats, therefore causing
>>> > further discrimination and under-representation of the poor, and
>>> > backward classes.
>>> >
>>> > 2. Reservations for Dalit seats have been made specifically in
>>> > areas where Muslims are in substantial numbers, often 50% or more.
>>> > So no Muslim can get elected from those constituencies, as Dalit
>>> > Muslims have not been granted the 'Dalit' status, in spite of
>>> > Ranganath Mishra Commission having recommended it, firmly. AMP's
>>> > apprehension is that with women's reservation, the total number of
>>> > such 'reserved' seats will further mitigate the chances for
>>> > Muslims to get elected.
>>> >
>>> > 3. Despite having a population of around 16 per cent, Muslims have
>>> > only 5.52% representation in the Parliament. Currently there are
>>> > 29 Muslim MPs in the country in the 15th Lok Sabha which includes
>>> > only three Muslim women MPs (approx 5% ). If 33 % reservation for
>>> > women is added to the existing 22.5 % for scheduled castes and
>>> > tribes, more than 50 per cent of seats in Parliament would be
>>> > reserved. This will result in drastic reduction of the already
>>> > ridiculously low representation of the Minorities, especially
>>> > Muslims in the Parliament.
>>> >
>>> > 4. The Sachhar Committee Report, and recently the Ranganath Mishra
>>> > Commission have elaborated upon the poor socio-economic condition
>>> > of Muslims in the country. As per the Sachhar Committee
>>> > recommendations Muslims of the country need pro-active support
>>> > from the government for upliftment. The government needs to re-
>>> > analyse the Women's Reservation Bill, and make necessary
>>> > amendments, keeping in mind the dismal status of Minorities,
>>> > especially the Muslim community, in the country.
>>> >
>>> > 5. AMP is not opposed to women's reservation, but the case of
>>> > Muslims, and other religious minorities should not be overlooked.
>>> > There should be reservation within reservation for women from the
>>> > Muslim and other minority groups. The bill in its current form is
>>> > a mockery of the pursuit of societal equality that the great
>>> > founding fathers of our nation had envisaged, as it will only
>>> > benefit the already dominant classes of the society.
>>> >
>>> > 6. Women's Reservation Bill was a big hope for Muslim women whose
>>> > presence is almost negligible in the Indian political system.
>>> > Those hopes have been dashed, because if the Women's Reservation
>>> > Bill in its current form becomes a law, there are fair chances
>>> > that the number of Muslims may go down.
>>> >
>>> > 7. This Bill exposes the negligent, and callous attitude of the
>>> > major parties towards Muslims, the biggest minority group of the
>>> > country. These parties make tall claims about wishing the
>>> > involvement of all religious sections of the country in politics,
>>> > but when it comes to the reservation of Muslims, they backtrack.
>>> > This attitude of the political parties should change if there has
>>> > to be any palpable improvement in the development index of the
>>> > Muslims, and other marginalized communities. Taking the above
>>> > points into context, we, the undersigned, strongly oppose the
>>> > existing Women's Reservation Bill in its current form. We appeal
>>> > to the political leadership of this country to take cognisance of
>>> > the above points and facilitate the representation of Minorities,
>>> > especially Muslims in the Women's Reservation Bill, and not
>>> > overlook the interests of the marginalised sections of the society.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>  __._
>> Peace Is Doable
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Green Youth Movement" group.
>> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected]<greenyouth%[email protected]>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> " The so called caste-hindus are bitterly opposed to the depressed class
> using a public tank not because they really believe that the water will be
> thereby spoiled or will evaporate but because they are afraid of losing
> their superiority of caste and of equality being established between the
> former and the latter. We are resorting to this satyagraha not becasue we
> believe that the water of this particular tank has any exceptional
> qualities, but to establish our natural rights as citizens and human
> beings."
>
> - Dr B.R. Ambedkar, Mahad Satyagraha Conference, December 25th , 1927
>
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Green Youth Movement" group.
> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<greenyouth%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to