Four hens in a cage - the real issue
Unfortunately, when we read about something in the news or anywhere else, our emotions get the better of us
The government of Punjab made headlines recently by announcing an “innovative” idea of providing girls in 1,000 primary schools with four hens, one cockerel, and a cage to teach them “kitchen skills.” Obviously, the scheme met with furious response from activists – especially women’s rights groups – across the country.
The widely accepted criticism of the programme is that it reinforces existing gender roles in our society which confines women to the kitchen. And in proceeding with this initiative, the government would effectively be supporting gender inequality.
However, this is not the first time that the government of Punjab did something controversial. In February, another contentious effort from the provincial government saw the Punjab Protection of Women Against Violence Bill being passed unanimously. This had also previously met with fierce criticism, and still does.
So, how can we truly gauge and question a government’s commitment towards women’s rights when, on one hand, it passes laws to give them more rights, protecting them from domestic violence, and on another, supports existing beliefs which restricts their role to the kitchen only?
Unfortunately, when we read about something in the news or anywhere else, our emotions get the better of us and we are quick to judge. And sadly enough, in our passionate response, we forget to ask more pertinent questions.
What should have been the highlight of the argument regarding this new programme was that how does the government intend to improve young girls’ kitchen skills by providing them with poultry.
Furthermore, the head of Punjab’s Livestock and Dairy Development Department claimed that the administration’s aim was to educate about nutrition, citing World Bank figures which shows Pakistan among top countries in the world with protein deficiency.
A concerned citizen should ask how does the proposed programme achieve the target of reducing protein deficiency? What is the rationale behind it, if there is one? And even if it does have some logical explanation to it, then how will the government tackle the problem of reinforced gender roles in society?
Rather than bashing and accusing the administration of the most populous province of our nation, we should provide constructive criticism, so that they too can learn and improve.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 29th, 2016.
The widely accepted criticism of the programme is that it reinforces existing gender roles in our society which confines women to the kitchen. And in proceeding with this initiative, the government would effectively be supporting gender inequality.
However, this is not the first time that the government of Punjab did something controversial. In February, another contentious effort from the provincial government saw the Punjab Protection of Women Against Violence Bill being passed unanimously. This had also previously met with fierce criticism, and still does.
So, how can we truly gauge and question a government’s commitment towards women’s rights when, on one hand, it passes laws to give them more rights, protecting them from domestic violence, and on another, supports existing beliefs which restricts their role to the kitchen only?
Unfortunately, when we read about something in the news or anywhere else, our emotions get the better of us and we are quick to judge. And sadly enough, in our passionate response, we forget to ask more pertinent questions.
What should have been the highlight of the argument regarding this new programme was that how does the government intend to improve young girls’ kitchen skills by providing them with poultry.
Furthermore, the head of Punjab’s Livestock and Dairy Development Department claimed that the administration’s aim was to educate about nutrition, citing World Bank figures which shows Pakistan among top countries in the world with protein deficiency.
A concerned citizen should ask how does the proposed programme achieve the target of reducing protein deficiency? What is the rationale behind it, if there is one? And even if it does have some logical explanation to it, then how will the government tackle the problem of reinforced gender roles in society?
Rather than bashing and accusing the administration of the most populous province of our nation, we should provide constructive criticism, so that they too can learn and improve.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 29th, 2016.