I have made it very clear in my statement as well as in published writings that I and my organisation are not opposed to reservation within reservation. It seems you are so busy abusing me as an 'upper caste feminist' that you can';t see that I am an ally of anyone genuinely concerned about representation of women among dalits/OBCs/minorities. But in that zeal, it does not help to give wrong facts. You weer arguing that the WRB will lead to fewer dalit women in parltt - I was proving otherwise.
On 2 April 2010 08:26, ranju radha <[email protected]> wrote: > i havent done a calculation. but it seems that these caste hindu women > seem to be cleverer than we thought. so how many seats for handful of > "upper" caste women? and how many for the majoritarian rest? let there > be populationwise distribution. Why not? > > and pls do enlighten me abt the provisions, if not a burden. > > And pls tell me how reservation within reservation is going to dilute it? > > aslo delighted to see this sudden "upper" caste love for reservation. > > On 4/1/10, Kavita Krishnan <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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]> > <greenyouth%[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]> > <greenyouth%[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]<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.
