Women soldiers: If the boot fits, why shouldn't they wear it?
Faraz Talat Updated a day ago
 |
Women from India's National Cadet Corps march during Republic Day parade. — AP
|
It’s disappointing that the country that proudly vaunted its army’s ‘Nari Shakti’ (woman power) recently, prompting a thumbs up from visiting President of the United States has once again turned its back on its female officers.
An official from the Indian defence ministry stated:
“Given the army’s involvement in counter-insurgency operations, it feels the terrain and working conditions are not conducive for women, either in the jungles of the northeast or in insurgency areas like Kashmir.”
Permit me to state the obvious biological fact: Fortunately, not every woman is an ‘average’ woman.
Like men, we have tall, short, big, small, frail and muscular women, of whom many possess the physical and mental capacity to effectively perform combat roles in the military.
Why would you disqualify a person simply for lacking a Y chromosome, even when she has amply demonstrated the strength and skill required to do the job?
Also read: Pakistan's female Rangers: Life on the base
And, let’s face it: a ‘combat role’ is basically what the army is all about.
It’s the center-stage, with all other services, however important, essentially the means of bolstering the army’s fighting capabilities.
To make the big league off-limits to women brings to mind centuries of female oppression. Of women serving as nurses, not doctors; secretaries, not CEOs; assistants, not scientists.
The woman, by the accident of birth itself, is doomed to always be second in-command of whatever unit she finds herself in, with the primary role happily occupied by the privileged male.
Integration of women in armed forces needn't be an experiment
Many enlightened countries around the world send women to combat zones, including Israel, Australia, France and Germany. Thus far, none of these armies have imploded from estrogen excess.
Pakistan also places numerous restrictions on its female officers, particularly in the naval force. Generally speaking, however, the Pakistan army has enjoyed invaluable female participation since 1947; a beacon for other militarised Islamic countries. Female commandos and combat pilots have faithfully served this country.
Although it does allow me some pride as a Pakistani feminist, the reason is not necessarily that Pakistan’s atmosphere is significantly less patriarchal than India’s.
While India, by its sheer size, managed to amass an impressively bulky armed force, Pakistan had to scramble to become militarily equal to its neighbour. Pakistan, as a result, wasn’t quite able to afford the traditional comforts of sexism, and get awfully picky about the gender of healthy cadets. The exasperated brass decided that if the army boot fits, one must be allowed to wear it.
In 1942, anticipating a Japanese assault on British-occupied India, Jinnah reportedly said,
"Be prepared to train the women. Islam doesn't want women to be shut up and never see fresh air".
The same attitude, perhaps, got carried forth into Pakistan when it first came into being. These days, however, our zest for gender equality has noticeably dwindled.
But this is not about Pakistan. This is about India and the decisions it’s going to make.
India has attracted glares from around the world for its treatment of women. With the recent statements by the Indian defence ministry vowing to uphold its tradition of gender discrimination, it’s unlikely that India’s image will soon change.
Female soldiers aren’t merely affirmative action hires, and “nari shakti” isn’t there for just appearances’ sake.
If one sufficiently demonstrates her skill and mettle, fairness dictates that she get the job irrespective of her race, caste, gender or religion.
Women in boots haven’t let Pakistan down, and they won’t disappoint India either.
No comments:
Post a Comment