Stray Thoughts- A Gender Sensitive India?

 

A Gender Sensitive India?                                  Molly Charles

               India had a profile change; it has become gender sensitive as women fare better in the population ratio check. The Indian Government is happy with the findings of National Family Health Survey (2020), pleased its government initiatives are working, since most of its initiatives are based on providing knowledge or creating awareness on gender concerns it would mean gender is an issue of development and culture has nothing to do with it.

This is in stark difference to gender insensitive practices that exists across India, which may also not be just culture, for it is not uncommon for the parents to see marriage as the best security blanket, they can offer to their girl child, at times even before she attains her marriageable age. The sad reality, the fear is real when considering violence against girls and women.

Then how come NFHS survey portrayed a reality that proves India has had a profile change.  Out of curiosity went through accessible data and arrived at some interesting queries about the profile change of India.

1.       If India has become gender sensitive how come the nutrition state of women remains static or got worse, for example let’s take a simple indicator access to food, anyone familiar with Indian way of life would know that when food is shared the best and nutritious one reaches the men and boys in the family and then the girl child and women. It is not something that women feel bad about, they seem to do the act as a kind of “tradition” or expression of concern for loved ones and least for themselves. If there has been a profile change then it should be reflected in data, but as per data of NFHS survey itself, in 1999 around 50% of women in urban and rural areas suffered from mild or moderate form of anaemia. Interestingly as per the data for NFHS for 2020 the percentage is around 52% for Uttar Pradesh; 56% for Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra; 60% for Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Telangana:  65% for Bihar, 70% for Gujarat, Jammu and Kashmir, West Bengal, and above 90% for Ladakh. How come?

2.        NHFS data has always indicated women out numbered men in rural areas and this has been because of migration for work but total always skewed favourably towards men except in case of age group above 50.

But the present claim  is that women outnumber men, this I am unable to understand for it would mean some how there has been a sudden change and it is not reflected in previous studies. As this positive change is not significant in case of children below 15 as indicated by survey data, the assumption must be that shift is noticeable among above the age group above  15 years. Under such circumstances:

-          How come surveys in 1999 and after, does not reflect such a shift, for example as per NFHS data the age group of 10-14 (the ratio is at 902) and for age group 15-19 (the ratio stood at 893). This is the national figure and the ratio indicators for lower age group are not very different. Since the present shift is for individuals above 15 years, how come shift was not seen earlier.

-          Or is the shift not about  a  change in attitude towards women, but rather the disappearance of men, if so, does it mean more men have lost their lives through accidents, or pandemic than accounted for?

3.     As though to reaffirm the situation has not changed, some states reflect a lower ratio for children born during last five years and sadly Kerala is one of the states. So, has there been a profile change?