The
recently released draft National Education Policy 2019 has equity as one of its
founding goals and gender envisioned as a cross-cutting theme. Yet, a closer
look at its recommendations, proposed equity-inducing initiatives, and use of
vocabulary renders its intent of establishing gender equality weak and vague. The
draft NEP is guilty of envisioning gender equality by focusing on female
students, with a brief discussion of including transgender children in schools,
and a conspicuous absence of any mention of male students vis-à-vis gender in
education. The fact that boys too grow up with a gendered identity, rooted in
notions of masculinity and superiority over other genders, seems to have been
ignored if not negated.
Closing the
gender gap has been envisioned by increasing access to education for girls,
ensuring their safety, lack of discrimination. Interventions to systemically
and systematically create gender-sensitive and gender-equal mindsets of boys
have been missed.
The section
on gender sensitisation in schools, that entails a mandate to conduct awareness sessions on gender issues to
break stereotyped gender roles, on the importance of harassment-free environments
and equal treatment of genders, and on legal protections and entitlements for
girls and women, makes no reference to the need to undo the constant
socialisation of young boys to acquire traits of ‘strength’ and ‘masculinity’. The
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) that has been put in
place for sexual offences against children- not limited to any particular
gender- has been interpreted as a legal protection for girls and women.
The
emphasis on ensuring safety and security of girls attending school is a
much-needed step. So is the effort to get transgender children to schools. However,
these are rudimentary steps. They cannot be the only major policy directives to
establish gender equality in education. While
the draft policy speaks of efforts to give girls equal access to education by
addressing societal obstacles, it stays silent on the role of boys and men in
establishing a gender equal education system. It fails to acknowledge that boys
are systematically socialised into becoming men who assume superiority and authority
over other genders, and that their education has a role to play in this
process. The draft talks of having female role models for girls, in order to strengthen
their ambition and change societal mindsets of women’s role. This is a step
that has a potential to have a positive rippling effect, with females getting
encouragement from one another while setting an example in front of the
society. A similar thought about having male role models for boys, setting an
example of gender sensitivity and practising respect for all genders, did not
cross the mind of makers of this draft.
The only
mention of boys in the section of gender equality is on the suggestion to have
schools and social workers talk to parents on placing financial expectations on
boys pre-maturely. The behaviour and attitude of boys vis-à-vis other genders has
not been addressed in the draft. Promoting gender equality through programmes
specifically targeted towards boys, along with those targeted towards girls and
transgenders, is amiss. Consent finds a faint mention in the section on sex
education as a part of the draft policy’s basic health and safety training. How
it is going to be imparted, when, and by whom is left unanswered.
Boys and
men have been excluded from the narrative on gender equality and inclusive
education by the draft NEP. The question then is- how do we expect the problem
of gender inequality to be solved by solely looking at girls and occasionally
at transgenders?
The issue
is in fact not just part of the draft NEP; it is part of regular conversations
and initiatives around gender equality. The presumption that gender-based
discrimination and gender inequality can be addressed by focusing on women and
solely on women is rather widespread. Gender issues are equated to what some of
us erroneously term ‘women’s issues. Seminars and conferences on gender
equality often end up becoming occasions where women talk to women about women.
While such women-to-women conversations are much needed, they cannot be
expected to resolve the gigantic issue of gender inequality. Men and boys need
to be included in the narrative. They too have a gender. And more so because
they have been identified as a part of the problem, it is only natural to have
them part of the solution.
Moreover, a
document that speaks of gender as a
cross-cutting theme for all aspects of policy implementation has apparently
not been reviewed for gender biases in its language. On the first page of the
draft NEP, the message from the Minister for Human Resource Development, talks
about one of the objectives of the NEP “to eliminate the shortage of manpower in science, technology,
academics and industry”. The choice of the term manpower among a range of
gender-neutral terms like workforce or human capital or human resources is
contradictory to the spirit of ‘equity’ invoked in a subsequent paragraph of
the same message. A policy draft that has references to gender sensitivity and
gender-neutral language has a Chairman
instead of a Chairperson at its helm.
The creation of a gender-inclusion fund
is expected to build capacity to provide
quality and equitable education to all girls. This makes it inconsistent with its own label. The fund’s aim of
providing equitable education cannot be restricted to girls, if it were to be
called a gender-inclusion fund. The reason for excluding transgenders and boys
from receiving equitable education with the help of this fund is confounding. Going
by the pillars of this fund as it stands currently, it would be more
appropriate to label it as a girls-inclusion fund.
While this
is the draft of the NEP and thus open to modifications, it is hoped that the final
text of the policy supports its promise of equity and gender equality in
education more sincerely and consciously. The NEP envisions an impact on what
children, for at least the next two decades, learn. It is thus critical that its
voice on gender equality in education does not emanate from an exclusion of any
gender that shall push the realisation of a gender-equal educational and social
order further away from the foreseeable future.
This piece was first published in the Hindustan Times on July 19, 2019 and can be accessed here- https://www.hindustantimes.com/editorials/the-draft-nep-has-a-gender-strategy-but-it-s-an-incomplete-one/story-BzJETdmz1V6uaMiiAt64HO.html
No comments:
Post a Comment