Gender and politics
At home, who usually cooks, washes clothes and looks after the little ones, and who is “the one who goes out to work”? Often the answer is decided by habit, not by ability.
Gender division is a hierarchy between men and women that is based not on biology but on social expectations and stereotypes. Patriarchy means a system that values men more and gives them power over women.
Key idea 1: Division of labour and public life — In most families the work inside the home is done by women, and men do the work outside; this is the sexual division of labour. Yet most women also do paid work, such as fetching water and working in fields in villages, or office and domestic work in towns, and their work is often unpaid, unrecognised and invisible. Because of this, women are half of humanity but have a small role in public life and politics. Women around the world organised for equal rights, including the right to vote; such movements for equality are called feminist movements. Thanks to them, women now work as scientists, doctors, engineers, lawyers and managers, and in countries like Sweden, Norway and Finland women’s participation in public life is very high.
Key idea 2: Women’s disadvantages in India — India is still a male-dominated society, and women face disadvantage in many ways. Women’s literacy is lower than men’s, and many girls drop out of school because parents spend more on sons’ education even though girls do as well as boys in results. Few women hold highly paid jobs, and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 says equal work must get equal wages, yet in many fields women are paid less. Many families prefer sons, and sex-selective abortion has pulled the child sex ratio (girls per 1,000 boys) down to 919 in the 2011 Census, and below 850 in some States. Women also face harassment and domestic violence.
Key idea 3: Women’s political representation — Feminists argue that unless women hold power, their problems will not get enough attention, so more women must be elected. Women were only 14.36 per cent of the Lok Sabha in 2019 for the first time at that level, and less than 5 per cent in State assemblies; India is in the bottom group of nations. One-third of seats in local bodies (panchayats and municipalities) are reserved for women, and lakhs of women now serve there. Women’s organisations have long demanded the same in the Lok Sabha and State assemblies; in 2023 Parliament passed the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam (Women’s Reservation Act) to give 33 per cent reservation there.
- Easy: A tailor in a hotel kitchen is paid and is a man; a woman cooks at home unpaid. What does this show? — Work is valued when paid; the same work is not valued when women do it at home.
- Medium: A panchayat has 15 seats. What is the minimum number reserved for women? — One-third of 15 = 5 seats.
- Exam-type: Why do feminists say women must be in power? — Otherwise issues of women’s well-being do not get enough attention.
In the figure: Women are strong in local bodies because of reservation; the gap is biggest in State assemblies.
What happened before the Women’s Reservation Act (2023)? In 1989 the government brought a Constitution amendment bill to reserve seats for women in panchayats. It passed the Lok Sabha but fell short of the needed votes in the Rajya Sabha that October. Three years later, in 1992, the 73rd and 74th Amendments were passed with one-third of local-body seats reserved for women, and they came into force in 1993.
What happened after the Women’s Reservation Act (2023)? In September 2023 Parliament passed the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, promising one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and State assemblies for women. The reservation is to start only after the next census and the redrawing of constituency boundaries, so women voters still wait to see it in practice.
Gender division is social, not biological. Women do much unpaid work; child sex ratio 919 (2011); Lok Sabha 14.36% (2019); local bodies reserve 1/3 seats; 2023 Act promises 33% in Lok Sabha and State assemblies.
Saying “women are naturally suited only for housework”. The division of roles comes from social expectations, not from biology; the proof is that women do every kind of job today.
Link the chain: stereotype → unpaid, unseen work → fewer in public life → fewer in power → problems ignored → demand for reservation. Memory clue: 919-14-1/3: child sex ratio, Lok Sabha % (2019), local-body reservation.
Spot the difference
| Point | Local bodies | Lok Sabha / State assemblies |
|---|---|---|
| Women’s reservation | 1/3 seats, in force from 1993 | 33% promised by the 2023 Act, after census and delimitation |
| Women’s share now | at least 1/3 | 14.36% (Lok Sabha 2019); under 5% (assemblies) |
Practice questions
- 1What is patriarchy?
- 2What was India’s child sex ratio in the 2011 Census?
- 3What fraction of local-body seats is reserved for women?
- 4What is the sexual division of labour?
- 5Give two ways in which women face disadvantage in India.
- 6What does the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 say, and is it fully followed?
- 7Why do feminists demand more women in elected bodies?
- 8Cause and result: how did women’s movements change women’s role in public life?
Show answers (try them yourself first)
- 1A system that values men more and gives them power over women.
- 2919 girls per 1,000 boys.
- 3One-third (at least).
- 4Women do the work inside the home and men the work outside it.
- 5Any two: lower literacy, school drop-out of girls, low share in well-paid jobs, lower wages, sex-selective abortion, harassment and domestic violence.
- 6Equal work must get equal wages; but in many fields women are still paid less.
- 7Unless women hold power, their issues do not get enough attention.
- 8They won equal rights including voting; women now work as scientists, doctors, lawyers and managers.
Religion, communalism and politics
A festival at school can bring every child together. But if one group says “only our festival is the real one”, the friendship breaks. The same difference exists in politics.
Communalism is the idea that religion is the principal basis of social community, and that followers of different religions cannot live as equal citizens in one nation. Communal politics is using religion in politics in an exclusive and partisan way.
Key idea 1: Religion in politics is not always wrong — Unlike gender, religious differences are often expressed in politics. Gandhiji said religion cannot be separated from politics, meaning moral values common to all religions, not any one religion. Human rights groups ask the government to prevent riots and protect minorities, and the women’s movement asks to reform the family laws of all religions to make them fairer to women. These are not wrong as long as every religion is treated equally. The problem begins when religion is made the basis of the nation and is used in an exclusive and partisan way.
Key idea 2: Why the communal belief is flawed — Communalism says that followers of a religion form one community with the same fundamental interests, and differences inside are trivial. In its extreme form it says that people of different religions cannot live as equal citizens, so one must dominate the rest or they must form different nations. This is flawed. People of one religion do not have the same interests in every context; everyone has several roles and identities, and there are many voices inside every community. Trying to bring all followers of one religion together on non-religious matters suppresses many of those voices.
Key idea 3: Forms of communalism in politics — Communalism takes several forms. (1) Everyday beliefs: religious prejudices, stereotypes and the belief that one’s religion is superior; this is so common that we often fail to notice it. (2) Quest for political dominance: for the majority, majoritarian dominance; for a minority, a wish for a separate political unit. (3) Political mobilisation on religious lines: using sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and fear, including special appeals to voters of one religion in elections. (4) Communal violence, riots and massacres: India and Pakistan suffered some of the worst at the time of Partition, and large-scale violence has happened after Independence too.
- Easy: A leader asks people to vote only because “we are of the same religion”. Which form is this? — Political mobilisation on religious lines.
- Medium: Two farmers of one religion disagree on water sharing. What does this show? — Members of one religion have different interests in different matters.
- Exam-type: Is it communal to ask the government to prevent riots and protect minorities? — No; that treats every religion equally.
In the figure: From a thought in the mind to violence on the street: the same belief at different levels.
Religion in politics is fine if every religion is treated equally. It becomes communal when one religion is called superior or opposed to another, or state power is used to dominate others.
Thinking that “communalism” means believing in a religion. Believing in a religion is not communalism; thinking one’s religion is superior and using it against others is.
Test question: “Does this treat every religion equally?” If not, it is communal. Memory clue: E-D-M-V: Everyday, Dominance, Mobilisation, Violence.
Spot the difference
| Point | Religion in politics (acceptable) | Communal politics |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment of religions | Equal | One against another |
| Example | Law reform for fairness to women | Fear and sacred symbols for votes |
Practice questions
- 1Define communalism.
- 2What did Gandhiji mean by religion in politics?
- 3Name the worst communal riots period mentioned.
- 4Name any three forms of communalism.
- 5When does religion in politics become wrong?
- 6Give one example of how a minority’s communalism may appear.
- 7Why is the belief that all followers of a religion have the same interests flawed?
- 8Explain political mobilisation on religious lines with an example.
Show answers (try them yourself first)
- 1The idea that religion is the main basis of community and that followers of different religions cannot be equal citizens in one nation.
- 2Moral values common to all religions, not any one religion; politics must be guided by ethics.
- 3The time of Partition.
- 4Any three: everyday beliefs; quest for dominance; mobilisation on religious lines; communal violence.
- 5When one religion is presented as superior or opposed to another, or state power is used to dominate others.
- 6A desire to form a separate political unit.
- 7People have many identities and interests; there are many voices in every community, and forcing unity suppresses them.
- 8Using sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeal and fear to unite voters of one religion; e.g. appeals made to one religion’s voters in an election.
Secular state and religious diversity
A school canteen that serves every child equally, whatever the child’s tiffin or festival, is fair. A school that gives special seats only to one group is not. The state is like that school.
A secular state is one that has no official religion, treats all religions equally and does not discriminate on grounds of religion.
Key idea 1: Constitutional provisions — The makers of the Constitution chose the model of a secular state because communalism was and remains a major challenge to democracy. (1) There is no official religion for the Indian state, unlike Buddhism in Sri Lanka, Islam in Pakistan or Christianity in England. (2) The Constitution gives all individuals and communities the freedom to profess, practise and propagate any religion, or to follow none. (3) It prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion. (4) It allows the state to intervene in religious matters to ensure equality within religious communities; for example, it bans untouchability.
Key idea 2: Secularism is a foundation of India — Secularism is not just the ideology of some parties or persons; it is one of the foundations of the country. Communalism is not a threat to some people only; it threatens the very idea of India, and that is why it needs to be combated. A secular Constitution is necessary but not sufficient. Communal prejudice and propaganda must be countered in everyday life, and religion-based mobilisation must be countered in the arena of politics.
Key idea 3: Religious diversity in the Census — The Census records the religion of every person every ten years, exactly as the person says it. In 2011 the shares were about Hindus 79.8 per cent, Muslims 14.2, Christians 2.3, Sikhs 1.7, and others (Buddhists, Jains and others) about 2. Since Independence the numbers of every community have grown, but their shares in the total have changed only slightly. So the common impression that one community will soon overtake the rest is mistaken; the overall balance of religious communities is not likely to change in a big way.
- Easy: Does India have an official religion? — No.
- Medium: The state bans untouchability inside a religion. Is this against secularism? — No; the Constitution allows such intervention to ensure equality.
- Exam-type: In 2011 Hindus were 79.8% and Muslims 14.2%. Together what per cent? — 94.0%.
In the figure: The shares have changed only slightly since Independence.
Secular state: no official religion; freedom to profess, practise, propagate; no discrimination; state may intervene for equality inside a religion (e.g. ban on untouchability).
Thinking that a secular state is against religion. It does not oppose any religion; it protects freedom of all and treats all equally.
Four-point check: No official religion · Freedom of faith · No discrimination · State can fix inequality inside religions. Memory clue: N-F-D-I: No religion, Freedom, Discrimination banned, Intervene for equality.
Spot the difference
| Country | Official religion | Note |
|---|---|---|
| India | None | freedom of all faiths |
| Sri Lanka | Buddhism (special status) | as given in the book |
| Pakistan | Islam | as given in the book |
| England | Christianity | as given in the book |
Practice questions
- 1What is a secular state?
- 2Does the Indian state have an official religion?
- 3Which religion had the largest share in the 2011 Census?
- 4Name any two constitutional provisions that make India secular.
- 5Give an example of the state intervening in religion to ensure equality.
- 6How does the Census record a person’s religion?
- 7Why is a secular Constitution necessary but not sufficient to combat communalism?
- 8Cause and result: why is the idea that one community will overtake the rest mistaken?
Show answers (try them yourself first)
- 1A state with no official religion that treats all religions equally and does not discriminate on religion.
- 2No.
- 3Hinduism (79.8%).
- 4Any two: no official religion; freedom to profess, practise, propagate; ban on discrimination; state may intervene for equality.
- 5Banning untouchability.
- 6Exactly as the person describes it; “no religion” or “atheist” is also recorded as said.
- 7Because prejudice and propaganda must also be fought in daily life and in politics, not only in law.
- 8Because the numbers of all communities have grown but their shares have changed only slightly since Independence.
Caste and politics
In some places people once could not share a well, a school bench or a meal because of the caste they were born into. Today the law forbids it, yet old habits still survive in places.
Caste system is an extreme form of hereditary occupational division, sanctioned by rituals; it excluded and discriminated against the ‘outcaste’ groups. Unlike gender and religion, caste division is special to India.
Key idea 1: Caste then and now — In the caste system, members of a caste were supposed to follow the same or similar occupation, marry within the caste and not eat with other castes. The ‘outcaste’ groups suffered untouchability. Leaders and reformers such as Jotiba Phule, Gandhiji, B. R. Ambedkar and Periyar Ramaswami Naicker worked to build a society without caste inequality. Because of their efforts and other changes (economic development, urbanisation, literacy and education, occupational mobility, weaker landlords) old notions of caste hierarchy are breaking down, and the Constitution prohibits caste discrimination. Yet most people still marry within their caste or tribe, untouchability has not ended completely, and caste is still linked to economic status.
Key idea 2: Caste in politics — Casteism is the belief that caste is the sole basis of social community, so people of one caste share the same interests and none with other castes. Caste appears in politics in several ways. When choosing candidates, parties keep in mind the caste composition of the electorate. When governments are formed, parties try to include representatives of different castes. Parties and candidates appeal to caste sentiment, and some parties are seen as representing particular castes. Universal adult franchise and one person, one vote forced leaders to seek support from all, and it brought new consciousness among castes once treated as inferior. The Scheduled Castes were 16.6 per cent and Scheduled Tribes 8.6 per cent of India in 2011, and OBCs are estimated at around 41 per cent.
Key idea 3: Elections are not only about caste — Focus on caste can wrongly suggest that elections are all about caste, which is far from true. No parliamentary constituency has a clear majority of one caste, so every party and candidate needs support of more than one caste. No party wins all the votes of a caste, and many voters have more than one candidate of their caste to choose from. Ruling parties often lose, and voters’ attachment to a party is often stronger than to their caste. Caste politics can also push issues like poverty, development and corruption aside, and can lead to tension and even violence. At the same time, it gives some disadvantaged groups a chance to voice their demands and share power.
- Easy: A party picks a candidate whose caste is common in the area. Which form of caste in politics? — Choosing candidates by the caste composition of the electorate.
- Medium: Can one caste alone decide a constituency’s result? — No; no constituency has a clear majority of one caste.
- Exam-type: SC 16.6% and ST 8.6% (2011). Together what share? — 25.2%.
In the figure: Caste has weakened as a rule, but it is not gone from society or from politics.
What happened before the Mandal Commission report was implemented (1990)? In 1979 the government set up a commission under B. P. Mandal to study backwardness. It gave its report in 1980 and recommended 27 per cent reservation in central government jobs for Other Backward Classes. Then the report mostly stayed on the shelf for about ten years.
What happened after the Mandal Commission report was implemented (1990)? On 7 August 1990 the government announced that it would implement the 27 per cent reservation. This led to strong protests and heated debate in many cities. In November 1992 the Supreme Court, in the Indra Sawhney case, upheld the 27 per cent reservation for OBCs but said total reservation should generally stay within 50 per cent and that the ‘creamy layer’ of better-off families must be excluded.
Caste: hereditary occupation, marry within caste, untouchability; challenged by reformers and the Constitution. In politics: candidate choice, ministries, appeals, franchise. But no constituency has one caste majority; elections are not only about caste.
Saying that talking about caste in a textbook “promotes casteism”. Looking at where there is domination is how we reduce it; staying silent does not make caste disappear.
Two-sided rule: caste is both a resource for the weak (voice, power-sharing) and a risk (division, ignoring real issues). Memory clue: C-M-A-F: Candidates, Ministries, Appeals, Franchise.
Spot the difference
| Point | Positive side | Negative side |
|---|---|---|
| Voice | Disadvantaged groups demand a share | Divides people by caste |
| Issues | Caste inequality gets noticed | Poverty and development pushed aside |
| Result | More equal chances | Tension, even violence |
Practice questions
- 1What is the caste system?
- 2Name two social reformers who worked against caste inequality.
- 3What share of India’s population were SC and ST in 2011?
- 4Give any two ways in which caste appears in politics.
- 5Give two reasons to say that caste alone cannot decide elections.
- 6What did the Mandal Commission recommend?
- 7How do caste inequalities continue in India even today?
- 8Cause and result: explain how universal adult franchise changed caste politics.
Show answers (try them yourself first)
- 1A hereditary division of occupations sanctioned by rituals, with exclusion of ‘outcaste’ groups.
- 2Any two: Jotiba Phule, Gandhiji, B. R. Ambedkar, Periyar Ramaswami Naicker.
- 3About 25 per cent (16.6% + 8.6% = 25.2%).
- 4Any two: candidate selection, ministries, appeals to caste sentiment, parties seen as caste representatives.
- 5Any two: no constituency has a clear single-caste majority; no party gets all votes of a caste; voters attach to parties; ruling parties often lose.
- 627 per cent reservation in central government jobs for OBCs.
- 7Most people marry within caste; untouchability has not fully ended; upper castes are over-represented among the rich, and SC and ST have higher poverty.
- 8One person, one vote forced leaders to seek support from all castes and gave new consciousness to castes once treated as low.