Changing Companies’ Minds About Women

By M H Ahssan

Leaders who are serious about getting more women into senior management need a hard-edged approach to overcome the invisible barriers holding them back.

Despite significant corporate commitment to the advancement of women’s careers, progress appears to have stalled. The percentage of women on boards and senior-executive teams remains stuck at around 15 percent in many countries, and just 3 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are women.

The last generation of workplace innovations—policies to support women with young children, networks to help women navigate their careers, formal sponsorship programs to ensure professional development—broke down structural barriers holding women back. The next frontier is toppling invisible barriers: mind-sets widely held by managers, men and women alike, that are rarely acknowledged but block the way.

When senior leaders commit themselves to gender diversity, they really mean it—but in the heat of the moment, deeply entrenched beliefs cause old forms of behavior to resurface. All too often in our experience, executives perceive women as a greater risk for senior positions, fail to give women tough feedback that would help them grow, or hesitate to offer working mothers opportunities that come with more travel and stress. Not surprisingly, a survey we conducted earlier this year indicated that although a majority of women who make it to senior roles have a real desire to lead, few think they have meaningful support to do so, and even fewer think they’re in line to move up.

Our ideas for breaking this cycle are directional, not definitive. They rest on our experience in the trenches with senior executives, on discussions with 30 diversity experts, and on the reflections of leaders we’ve interviewed at companies that have been on this journey for years. These companies include Pitney Bowes, 38 percent of whose vice presidents are women; Shell, where more than a quarter of all supervisors and professional staff worldwide are women; and Time Warner, where more than 40 percent of the senior executives in its operating divisions are women and where the share of women in senior roles has jumped 30 percent in the past six years. Great progress, but even these three companies are the first to admit how much further they have to go.

Their collective experience suggests to us that real progress requires systemwide change driven by a hard-edged approach, including targets ensuring that women are at least considered for advancement, the rigorous application of data in performance dialogues to overcome problematic mind-sets, and genuine sponsorship. Committed senior leaders are of course central to such efforts, which can take many years. We hope our suggestions, and the real-life examples that illustrate them, will stir up your thinking about how to confront the silent but potent beliefs that probably are undermining women in your organization right now.

Invisible, unconscious, and in the way

For evidence of the problem, look no further than the blocked, leaky corporate-talent pipeline: women account for roughly 53 percent of entry-level professional employees in the largest US industrial corporations, our research shows. But according to Catalyst, a leading advocacy group for women, they hold only 37 percent of middle-management positions, 28 percent of vice-president and senior-managerial roles, and 14 percent of seats on executive committees. McKinsey research shows similar numbers for women on executive committees outside the United States—from a high of 17 percent in Sweden to just 2 percent in Germany and India. Our analysis further reveals that at every step along the US pipeline, the odds of advancement for men are about twice those for women. And nearly four times as many men as women at large companies make the jump from the executive committee to CEO.

To understand what’s going on, look to the words that appeared most frequently in open-ended responses to our recent survey as explanations for poor retention and promotion of women: “politics,” “management,” “the company,” “people,” and “the organization.” These forces manifest themselves in myriad ways. We’ve all heard endless variations on the mind-sets that set women up for failure:

“She’s too aggressive” (or “too passive”). Whether a woman is perceived as aggressive or passive, that’s different from the judgment a man would face, and she often doesn’t receive the coaching a man would to help her assimilate into the company’s culture.

“I don’t want to tell Bob he didn’t get that job.” There’s a limited pool of senior positions, and leaders are not comfortable telling protégés they have groomed for years that someone else is getting the spot.

“I don’t know how to talk to or mentor her.” Men tend to sponsor other men, find it harder to build relationships with people when they share fewer common interests, and sometimes are nervous about forging a close relationship that could seem inappropriate.

“If I put a woman in that role and she fails, it’ll set back all women.” Mind-sets like this one inadvertently treat men as individuals and women as representative of their whole gender.

“A woman isn’t right for that role.” Long-held stereotypes about the relative strengths of men and women survive, at least in vestigial form.

In the face of these silent but potent forces, it’s little wonder the careers of many promising women die on the vine. Slowly but surely—despite the best intentions of HR departments and individual executives—the experience of women starts to diverge from that of their male peers: Less opportunity for professional growth. Unintended performance bias and softer feedback. Fewer sponsors offering fewer opportunities and less advocacy. Lowered ambition. Greater satisfaction with staying put. Attrition and a fresh start at a different company.

A word about the role women play in this vicious cycle: they start out ambitious. Most young women, like young men, hope to move to the next level, and women who reach more senior levels retain that ambition. That said, women also turn down advancement opportunities for varied reasons, ranging from commitments outside work to risk aversion for positions that demand new skills to a desire to stay put in roles that provide personal meaning. In addition, mothers with more than one child are much more satisfied with staying put, our survey shows, though they remain highly confident about their performance and abilities.

Subtle changes in these attitudes toward advancement are another powerful benefit of changing how companies “think about women around here.” By addressing the mind-sets holding women back, corporate leaders can reshape the talent pipeline and its odds, increasing the number of women role models at the top and, in turn, making it likelier that more women will retain their ambition.

Changing companies’ minds

No program or initiative can be the “silver bullet” to advance women into senior roles. Rather, the whole organization must change. That’s hard work; it will take years and, potentially, even a generational transition. This goal requires a serious commitment from busy leaders, whose natural tendency is to discuss the issue, create a plan, and hand it off to HR. And it requires real engagement up and down the line, including engagement from women.

To make these changes, corporate leaders need to see them as no less important than a major strategic or operational challenge, such as falling market share or changing the corporate cost structure. And like efforts to address those challenges, efforts to advance women can’t just be add-on programs. They must be integrated into the organization’s daily work through goals, performance monitoring, processes that force tough conversations, and serious skill building.

Undertaking such a transformation in difficult economic times, when there are fewer opportunities to go around, may seem like a recipe for failure. But the fact is that these changes never will be easy and that a few companies, including those we focus on below (Pitney Bowes, Shell, and Time Warner), have managed to stay on course through both good times and bad.

Make it personal

Make no mistake: as a senior executive, you are already influencing your company’s approach. If you’re not paying much attention to the issue of women’s advancement, you’re ensuring that things won’t change. As Shell’s executive vice president of global supply and distribution, Peggy Montana, says, “When you look at corporate mind-sets, change starts at the top. I haven’t seen change in diversity start from middle management.”

And if you’re personally committed, you can catalyze change that will improve not only your company’s treatment of women but also, in all likelihood, its business results.⁵ In the early 1980s, Pitney Bowes CEO George Harvey learned that the most productive newly hired salespeople were women, many of whom had previously been schoolteachers. Curious to know the explanation, he visited sales offices late in the day and discovered women “writing personal notes to their customers with a lot of conviction”—a practice that, further inquiry revealed, seemed to be driving sales.

According to Pitney Bowes executive vice president Johnna Torsone, Harvey’s recognition of the value of these committed women touched off a wave of change. Torsone says Harvey became “determined to open up an environment that allowed people to come in who hadn’t had a true opportunity on a level playing field.” They would be motivated, he reasoned, and their success would “increase the competitive environment for the men and for everybody else in the organization.” The end result, Torsone explains, “was an HR strategy based on business.”

This is a powerful idea that resonates with our experience: strong as the general business case for women is, companies are more likely to transform mind-sets if they build their own case. That case should be grounded in the impact women are having at your own organization—whether hard business results or indirect benefits, such as building better teams. Harvey’s commitment also highlights the importance of having leaders start this journey by changing their own mind-sets: all transformations start with the self; leaders influence everyone else in the organization through their attitudes and actions.

Change the conversation

It’s one thing for executives to commit themselves to change. It’s another to actually make progress. A starting point is making sure enough women are being considered for advancement, to boost the odds that some will get through. Broadening the conversation ensures that high-talent women aren’t “underexposed,” compared with men, as senior executives talk through promotion possibilities. While putting one woman on the promotion slate will not change the discussion, focusing on metrics will. And though most companies are loath to consider quotas, they’re far from the only way to introduce a hard edge to the ongoing talent dialogue.

Pitney Bowes, for example, focused on the front end. For a number of years, every list of candidates for promotion there had to include 35 percent women and 15 percent minorities, equal to their representation in the workforce at the time. Harvey chose this approach because “he felt that white men had been disproportionately advantaged and had gotten complacent,” Torsone explains.

Shell focused on outcomes, setting a long-term target for women at the top: currently, 20 percent of the company’s senior executives worldwide. So far, women hold just over 15 percent of those positions, up from 10 percent in 2005. The company includes an assessment of progress against this target in all senior executives’ reviews and presents the overall results in its annual report.

At Time Warner, chief diversity officer Lisa Quiroz explains that each division is required to have a succession plan and a robust promotion slate for its top layers of management. The CEO and the HR chief review the plans and slates every year for diversity, among other criteria. This review also includes specific discussions about how individual women are being prepared for their next role, including rotation among the company’s divisions and between staff and line roles. For more than a decade, a noticeable part of each divisional CEO’s bonus has depended on meeting the company’s expectations for diversity.

Will men raise concerns? Maybe. They did early on at Pitney Bowes, despite support for diversity from the top. “George [Harvey],” Torsone explains, “brought challenge and passion to the focus, but it felt alienating to the men. That was not the intention, and so it had to evolve. When I came in, we broadened our efforts to upgrade talent development, making it better for everyone. We still see resistance from men occasionally, but the overall culture changed, and those attitudes are really disappearing.”

And what about women? Shell’s Montana says her response to fears from women that they’re getting jobs just because of their gender is, “Get over it. I’ve never seen a selection panel pick somebody on the basis of, ‘She’s not really qualified, but we need a female in this job.’ It just doesn’t happen. We’re running a business, and we’re not taking undue risks. It’s never going to be a risk-free exercise. But neither is it for the rest of the population.”

Use data to create transparency and challenge entrenched mind-sets

Most companies collect some data on diversity. Yet few track the results in enough detail to help executives gain a real understanding of what’s going on in their own departments or business units and how their mind-sets may be contributing. Furthermore, many companies track data only at the executive level, not down to the front line. They therefore have no idea what their pipeline really looks like, let alone how to improve it. PepsiCo, by contrast, tracks the progress of women at all levels and shares the results throughout its talent review processes. As a result, the full pipeline of female talent—not just the senior ranks, which are much harder to influence rapidly—is highly visible.

When the findings are impossible to overlook, leaders can use them to make the invisible mind-sets visible and then manage these mind-sets to remove their influence. Pitney Bowes carefully rates and scores each division’s diversity plan and, like Time Warner, includes in its bonus decisions an executive’s success in promoting diversity. Furthermore, Torsone says, from the time this process was started, during the 1980s, the CEO “would talk about it at every operating and management review.”

Of course, any top-down talent review process conducted primarily by senior men can unintentionally reinforce the status quo. Bottom-up survey data can help shake things up, however. Each year, Shell asks all employees to answer a survey with 61 questions, ranging from how they like working at the company to whether they feel able to speak up freely. The company uses the results from five of these questions to measure the inclusiveness of the work culture and how it changes year to year. Shell also analyzes the responses of groups such as men and women, different nationalities, and different tenures to see whether their experiences diverge.

One way the company uses the results is to measure the effectiveness of supervisors in creating an environment where everyone feels engaged and able to excel. The results flag outliers: parts of the organization where everyone can thrive and those areas where some or all employees feel stymied (those are addressed by specific follow-up plans). Over the years, Shell has seen the gap between men’s and women’s experiences shrink—a positive trend. There’s still the question of whether gender-based attitudes influence responses to surveys like these. In our experience and in Shell’s, though, they are much better than nothing.

Rethink genuine sponsorship for women

For men and women alike, effective sponsors can make careers through ongoing, in-the-moment support. Sometimes that means supporting women in stretch roles. In the words of a female executive at a financial-services firm, “The head of the business offered me a big promotion that entailed a move, but then he said, ‘We’re going to make 100 percent sure that you don’t fail. We have your back, so take this promotion.’ He called the executive who would become my new boss to extract that commitment, and that made it a lot easier for me to take on this scary, big step.”

At other times, the best thing a sponsor can do is offer tough love. Shell’s Montana says she has “held some people back from the next level until they had more of an operational P&L role. I felt that if they didn’t have it, at least in a reasonably early time in their career, it would hold them back once they had the opportunity for more senior levels.”

Clear as the benefits are, so are the challenges of sponsorship for women: many male executives feel more comfortable sponsoring men or simply don’t know how to be effective sponsors for women. Take one common kind of sponsor we’ve met in dozens of workshops—the “relentless coach” who pushes the sponsoree to the breaking point. While many men recall this grueling experience with gratitude and even affection for the sponsor, it doesn’t work well for many women, especially those who carry the burden of responsibility at home in addition to their work. Another valuable, but often controversial, kind of sponsor is what we call the “devil’s advocate.” We all value being challenged to make our work better, but many women find that constant questioning drains their confidence and energy. With self-awareness and training, sponsors can learn to adapt their styles to the individual and situation at hand.

Effective sponsors are deeply, personally engaged, down to the level of small details, whose importance adds up. Time Warner’s Quiroz describes true sponsorship as “someone being planful about what you do, who you’re exposed to, what development programs you go to, who you have lunch with, whether you’re getting feedback or being assigned a coach.” At her company, leaders work hard to make women’s careers “intentional.” One key: making sure that sponsorees attend Time Warner women’s leadership programs, where participants interact with top management and learn to overcome their own limiting mind-sets and behavior. So far, among the more than 300 leaders who have attended Time Warner’s program for senior women, 22 percent have been promoted, compared with only 11.8 percent of all women at a similar level in the company.

We hope you draw inspiration from these examples. If you’re ready to start challenging the broadly held mind-sets holding women back in your organization, first become conscious of your own beliefs and how they affect your behavior and decisions. Then, as you help your company move forward, remain vigilant: every time a senior executive leaves or enters an organization, its culture can—and does—shift. It is up to the senior team to help new executives become active participants in this journey and to make regular efforts to inject the energy that the organization as a whole will need to change its mind about women.

Women in India Form Their Own Political Party

By Aditi Bhaduri

The first all-women's political party in India has formed after 100 women joined. A first order of business is to boost female representation in parliament from 8 to 50 percent. Seventh in a series on the changing role of women in India.

It is a mellow April morning in Delhi. Soft sunlight filters through the trees that line the boulevards of the city's stately Krishna Menon Marg neighborhood.

Suman Krishan Kant, however, is oblivious to the tranquillity outside the windows of her well-appointed bungalow.

The prominent social activist is reviewing and paying bills while files wait on the table for her attention. The elegant waiting room outside is beginning to fill in with men and women hoping to meet with her and enlist her advocacy with government agencies on their behalf. One of them, for instance, is a widow who hopes Kant will help her application for an increase in her pension.

It is the beginning of another working day for the president of the country's all-women's political party.

In February, Kant, the widow of former vice president Krishan Kumar Kant, joined with other influential women to launch the United Women's Front to address issues such as women's illiteracy, early marriage and tokenism in parliament, where women hold just 8 percent of seats. To qualify for official party status, the group had to muster at least 100 members and pay about $300 in registration fees.

"Women have simply not been getting the kind of governance they deserve," says Kant. "Take Delhi for example. It has a female chief minister, yet it is one of the most dangerous places for women . . . All this is precisely because we do not have enough women in decision-making and in the political process. A few women here and there cannot make much of a difference."

Prem Ahluwalia is a journalist who specializes in women's issues and directs the Dehli-based Institute for South Asian Women, which seeks to foster ties among women in India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and the Maldives. She is also the United Women Front's national general secretary.

"It is for the first time in the history of India that a national political party has been formed by women," she says. "In fact it is the only party of women in the world. We need to ensure that the issues of priority concern to half of its population remain in the forefront of the pressing issues on India's national agenda."

Land of Contradictions
India is often called a land of contradictions and that pertains to the status of women here. The national constitution guaranteed women's legal equality in 1950. India also elected Indira Ghandi in 1966, making her the world's second female prime minister after Sri Lanka's Sirimavo Bandarnaike, who took office in 1960.

This past July Pratibha Patil was elected the country's first female president, a mostly ceremonial position that nonetheless leaves India with a female head of state.

Women hold top cabinets posts and at least three states have female chief ministers. Village councils reserve 33 percent of their seats for women.

On the other hand, millions of women live in poverty, illiteracy, malnourishment and ill-health. In November, the World Economic Forum's latest gender gap index put India among the world's 10 most gender-biased economies, with women's participation in the paid work force at 36 percent.

Recently, Sonia Gandhi, the female president of the All India Congress Party, the ruling party in the coalition government, said she was unable to pass a bill first introduced in 1996 that ensures 33 percent of parliamentary seats--the widely assumed critical mass--go to women.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development in 2006 drafted a bill for the prevention of workplace sexual harassment that was supposed to have been passed this year. However, it is still pending.

New Law Lacks Implementation
National statistics from 2005 to 2008 show 45 percent of Indian women suffer from domestic abuse. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act passed through parliament in 2005 and came into force last year.

Lawyers, however, widely lament that insufficient arrangements have been made for them to handle cases brought under the law. For instance, the trained personnel--counselors, protection officers, service providers--called for by the law are not in place.

The party has these types of issues in its sights. In the two months since its formation, however, it has focused on recruitment and making 50 percent female representation in parliament its chief objective.

So far the party has established organizations in 16 of India's 28 states. The groups vary in size. The Delhi chapter, for instance, claims 25,000 members; another state chapter claims 5,000.

The chapters are mainly led by veteran activists. The state of Orissa, for instance, has Shanti Das, a well-known union activist; Punjab has Pam Rajput, a prominent women's rights activist and scholar.

Men Join In
But that doesn't mean the party excludes men.

As Women's eNews visits Kant's office, in fact, Mohamed Shafique, 24, walks in, pulls out a file from the cupboard and starts leafing through it. He is preparing to begin the day as one of the party's workers in Delhi, which holds state-level elections in July 2008, the first test of the new party's ability to make a mark.

United Women Front is planning to field candidates for all 72 of Delhi's assembly seats. So far it is stressing education and safety for women and an end to all kinds of violence against women.

"We need the youth," says Kant, referring to Shafique, "because India has a young population." According to official statistics here, 50 percent of India's population of 1.1 billion in 2006 was under 25.

"We are not against men," Kant says. "We need men to work with us and we need their support."

However, she draws certain lines.

"Men will not be part of the national committee," says Kant firmly. "Men will be members of state chapters only; but we will have only women at the national level."

Verdict 2009: Does it Make a Difference to Women?

By Kalpana Sharma

One could not escape them before, during, or after these elections. Four women dominated the cut and thrust of Election 2009 to the 15th Lok Sabha. Sonia Gandhi, Mamata Banerjee, Mayawati and Jayalalithaa. In a country where women still suffer discrimination from birth, this in itself is remarkable - that women now run four major political parties, the Congress Party, the Trinamool Congress, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), respectively.

Apart from these four, women were everywhere - as voters, campaigners and candidates. Only 462 women contested as compared to 6,538 men. But 59 of them won, which is a much higher percentage of success than for men. And for the first time ever, the number of women in the Lok Sabha accounted for 10.70 per cent of the total. The 14th Lok Sabha had only 45 women Members of Parliament (MPs), a mere 8.7 per cent of the total house strength. But 10.7 per cent is still lower than many other parliaments around the world. And it is less than a third of what women have been demanding for the last 11 years.

While increasing numbers and a few prominent women do suggest an increase in political participation, this will not automatically translate into women-friendly policies or a government sensitive to gender concerns. Yet, the results of this election do bring with them a sliver of hope that women's participation in electoral politics could increase and be qualitatively different from the past.

For example, this time, apart from widows, wives, daughters, daughters-in-law, sisters and mothers of male politicians standing from safe seats nurtured by the men, several women who normally would not have considered entering the fray have done so. Career women who do not belong to "political" families have chosen to either join existing political parties, or stand as independents. This represents a notable break from the past.

Take the case of one of Rahul Gandhi's young protégés, Meenakshi Natarajan, who stood from Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh and won. Annu Tandon of the Observer Research Group, who has a corporate background, won from Unnao, Uttar Pradesh (UP), again, on a Congress Party ticket. And even though she lost, well-known dancer and activist Mallika Sarabhai made her presence felt as an independent challenging the might of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its leader L.K. Advani in Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

The victories of women like Natarajan and Tandon do seem to suggest that women have a greater chance of success if they are supported by or are candidates of a political party, than if they stand as independents.

Unfortunately, political parties continue to pitch women against one another. So in Lucknow, for instance, the Congress fielded their state party president, Rita Bahuguna Joshi, against the Samajwadi Party's Nafisa Ali. Both lost and the BJP candidate, Lalji Tandon won. In one of the most high profile contests, Telugu actress and sitting MP, Jaya Prada of the Samajwadi Party narrowly beat Congress's Noor Begum in Rampur, UP.

On the positive side, although many female relatives of male politicians won from safe constituencies, not everyone succeeded. When the Supreme Court ruled that people convicted of crimes could not stand for elections, several powerful MPs in Bihar fielded women from their families. Rakesh Ranjan, or Pappu Yadav, sentenced to life in 1998 for murder, fielded his wife Ranjit Ranjan and his mother, Shanti Priya. Both lost. The notorious Mohammed Shahabuddin, convicted for four murders, had his wife Hina stand from Siwan. She too lost. Vina Devi, the wife of Surajbhan, also convicted for murder, lost in Nawada. And in Sheohar, Lovely Anand, wife of Anand Mohan convicted for murder, failed miserably.

With an increasingly discerning electorate, it is evident that being related to a powerful man will not guarantee the success of women candidates. Such a change will work in favour of women who want to contest but fear confronting criminal elements in politics.

While women getting elected from political families and safe seats undercuts the demand for a level playing field for women in politics, increasingly many such women are beginning to carve a distinctive place for themselves. The most obvious person in this category is Congress President, Sonia Gandhi. When she took office, no one believed her capable of managing India's oldest political party. Today, no one questions it.

Even amongst the younger women, we see signs of such capability. Supriya Sule, Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar's daughter, has had an easy time entering politics first through the Rajya Sabha and now into the Lok Sabha by contesting from Baramati, a family fiefdom. Yet, Sule has already been noticed for articulating concerns such as the persistent malnutrition amongst children. She was part of a campaign by young MPs to draw attention to this problem.

Similarly, Congress's Priya Dutt, daughter of the late Sunil Dutt, got elected from his seat when he died mid-term. Today, she has proved that she can win on her own steam, in a constituency with many new segments. In fact, she is the only one of the five Congress MPs from Mumbai who has won in all her six Assembly segments and the reason is her reputation for being accessible and involved with her constituents.

These elections have shown again that more women now want to be in politics. And not just in national politics. Thousands of women are already politically engaged at the 'panchayat' (village) and 'nagarpalika' (municipal) levels. And even if not all of them are members of political parties, it is only a matter of time before they begin demanding space. In states like Bihar, the reservation for women in 'panchayats' and 'nagarpalikas' is now 50 per cent. Political parties will not be able to resist this thrust from the grassroots and would inevitably have to field more women candidates for the assemblies and the Lok Sabha.

Even if the number of women elected has increased only marginally, their influence through the major parties has increased. Every party now routinely includes gender concerns in its manifesto. The last government instituted several policies specifically addressing women's concerns, such as the Domestic Violence Bill and programmes curbing sex-selective abortions and encouraging female literacy. The two non-Congress Chief Ministers who have done well in their respective states, Shivraj Singh Chouhan in Madhya Pradesh and Nitish Kumar in Bihar, have actively pursued policies that benefit women. Thus, it is clear that addressing women's concerns does translate into votes.

With a higher percentage of elected women in the Lok Sabha and with many newcomers who might be less prejudiced and more open to the idea of reservation of seats for women, perhaps the Women's Reservation Bill will finally see the light of day. More women need to be in politics not because they make better politicians, which they very well could, but because women have the right to be represented in policy-making when they make up half the population.

Muslim working women and society

By Samiya Anwar

It is a malevolent society. And what truly astounds is the gender bias, it still exists. men favoritism isn’t it weird? Yes it is. We all know today’s women are independent but also in the shambles and tattered mostly. This is a bizarre. An odd reality! But modern women are bombarded by unrealistic expectations from within themselves and by external demands from home, work, relationships, and traditions. Life is not easy. It’s surely difficult for them especially if they are Muslim.

Women here, we can categorize into three types. Firstly a traditional house wife, secondly, a working woman of fast paced world and lastly a modern woman who manages everything. All the three are different and masters of their occupation. It would be no good to say only women working in offices or companies are working women and not others. Our grand mothers and mothers are for instance traditionally working for the well-being of the family. They are religiously very good as they hear our fathers, doesn’t demand to work and have a job of own. They are dependent on the male members, also happy. But now the need of women has expanded the horizon and walks with the world not just they talk and stay back, they participate. They have redressed the area of gender.

Moreover a working woman faces much hype in everything. What a women at home doesn’t not. Unlike other religions Muslim women, in the present era, faces lot of stereotype against the male dominance society.

An independent and working woman is a good turn-on. Either they are single, married, divorcees or childless every working female has so many open advantages. They are confidently walking the corporate ladder and have proved as successful entrepreneurs and CEO’s what not. Men love the women who are beautiful, independent and outspoken. They are appreciated. But not all. When it comes to a family and marriage she is not the right choice for many. Men are smart. Every Muslim man wants somebody who can be at home. They think that the first duty of women is to be women of house and nothing else. If a women serves food, washes clothes and irons it, which is still loved by husbands. The career women are not in their list. Men like women to be their associates at home they want women supporter not decision makers. And this is what makes the working women wonder. Soha (name changed), 26 is working in Gen pact from five years and has no plans to tie the knot. She is smart, independent, liked by many everywhere. But for marriage the guys don’t choose her. They are scared of her independence. She wishes to work after marriage and there is less who understands her. What is wrong if a women wishes to work after marriage? This made her broke and she decided not to marry for some time. Her matrimonial side is zero when compared to others. All her friends are married and have children. She feels isolated though successful following her dreams.

Every time we attempt to assert ourselves as Muslim women we are accused of being influenced by the West, isn’t that wrong. It is not only Soha who was single and stressful. Many others are in such circumstances. There is a very unfriendly environment within our own communities. The same stereotype questions arise all time if a women works. Like Bushra (name changed) is a call centre employee whose mother was ashamed to say the relatives that her daughter is employed in a job. She is scared to reveal that she is working in a night shift. Bushra stood tall in times of crises and proved a good support for the family. What is wrong if she is working in the night? According to her mother, “everyone and everybody start questioning from friends to neighbors, all. Whenever I go out to parties, or have a family get-together, or leave my house, the question inevitably gets asked, “Why are you sending your daughter in the night?” but how long it will be anonymous. Our own parents feel we shouldn’t work, though we support the work. Isn’t it?

Also the married women are victims of several typecast questions. She spends more time in the office than at home. The boss, male co-workers and husband she is shattered in pieces with the work pressure, household chores, children and husband, all makes her drained of life. No time for grooming and friends forget about the “Me Time”. Life is not rosy. She is always reminded of her religion that she walks with the pride of religion and family. She should maintain the poise and be reserve.

“You’re a Muslim” this is the statement told to every girl almost every day stepping out of the houses. There is a big burden she carries when she make a foot out. Why? why because she is a Muslim.

Islam liberated women 1400 years ago and history is a proof of women being successful in every area of society. They were women participants in the war, political activities and economic needs. Though it is grisly that women with more freedom has became slaves of modernity. The women from burqa’s turned to tramp. The old notion of society is been altered. They work, they are independent. They are keeping men at guessing. In the newspapers and magazines we see and hear so many Muslim women being harassed and molested. The same old complains my boss repeatedly puts his arm around my waist when discussing work-related matters. The co-workers unwelcome comments often make me uncomfortable. Who is to be blame? The female workers or the boss, if the women dress shabbily, doesn’t care of modesty while dressing. Such things are common and act as an open invitation to men. In such a case you either get afraid of loosing job or welcome the advances of such people. Good women changes the job and it is been observed that women have more reasons to change jobs frequently than men. A woman doesn’t walk alone when she works outside.

Nevertheless ness we Muslim women can walk with pride and dignity in the society only if we maintain the true concept of women. Working is no sin. It is good if a woman supports her parents or husband. But changing the dimensions of society is no fair. Religion is an important aspect of life and every woman should understand and be in the limits of the boundaries set by the religion and society as well.

Also Read:

Employment concerns for working Muslim women

Can Islam liberate women?

Shattering Illusions - Western Conceptions of Muslim Women

Muslim Women - Change in the air

Women Sarpanchs: 'Fighting Against All Odds' In MP

By Shirish Khare / Bhopal

Panchayats of Madhya Pradesh provide reservation of up to 50 per cent for women, but the participation of women in governance has gone beyond such new roles. INN Live reports on how women leaders are transforming the very traditions and symbols of grassroots politics. 

It does not take much time to form stereotypes, especially if these are negative and related to women.

WISHING A HAPPY 'INT'L WOMENS' DAY 2013'

Today, March 8 is celebrated as International Women’s Day around the world every year. INN salutes the spirit of women for their accomplishments and unlimited sacrifices.

This day reminds you of sacrifices made by women everywhere
International Women’s Day is a day to remember the sacrifices made by women at times of need across the world. It is the day to celebrate the economic, political and social achievements of women. The day also reminds you of the contributions made by women for international peace and security. Women have struggled a lot in the past and are now able to walk shoulder-to-shoulder with men. They have achieved financial independence with education and developed a life of dignity and self-worth. So we need to celebrate the day with pride and honour. At our home we celebrate Women’s Day by giving gifts to my daughter and make her understand the worth of the day and the privileges of being a woman. 

Women’s Day should focus on those living in rural parts of India
Women’s Day can be so much more than just a commercial exercise. It is being reduced to offering free treatment at a spa, film tickets at discounted rates and other such gimmicks to make the urban women feel special and beautiful. But it should be a day to acknowledge the immense strength women exhibit in their day-to-day lives throughout the year. In today’s context, Women’s Day should focus more on those women living in the rural parts of India. They are not even aware that such a day exists but they continue to make a huge difference to their own lives and that of others. The need of the hour is to make them understand their importance and worth. Women’s Day is an occasion to acknowledge their strength. 

Women today have made a mark in every aspect of life
Women’s Day is a way to recognise the contribution made by women in various facets of life. For me it is a significant day as I engage myself with earnestness to achieve benchmarks set by me both professionally and socially. We surely are proud of our accomplishments. But we still have a long way to go and loads to achieve. Women today have made a mark in every aspect of life; academically, professionally and now politically. This year, many women stepped forward to contest polls to become corporators and policy makers, which in itself is a huge achievement.

This day serves as a podium to pay homage to womanhood
Attributing one day to celebrate womanhood does not justify the capabilities and achievements of women. Nonetheless, this day at least gives an opportunity to acknowledge the sacrifices of women. Woman has been gifted with the power to create. The power of giving birth makes a woman very powerful. However, the country has delayed in giving due credit to women. The 50% reservation in the recent polls should have happened much earlier. As for the significance, this day serves as a podium to pay homage to womanhood. There are various programmes organised on female foeticides, woman empowerment and sanitation for women that I will be attending on this occasion. Besides, we will be soon opening a charitable organisation that will focus on woman empowerment. 

Women’s Day is an occasion to identify who we are Women’s Day is the celebration of the identity of a woman. Though this identity accompanies the woman throughout the year, a particular day to celebrate it is something like an acknowledgement. This day is more important in a country like India as women were not given the same platform as that of men. For me, Women’s Day is an occasion to identify who we are. It is to salute the womanhood as it different from manhood. There is a lot of juggling and compromises involved, which needs a lot of strength. The day serves as an occasion to celebrate and recognise this strength. In today’s world though a woman has the privilege to work, it does not free her from household duties. To manage these two aspects needs a lot of effort and strength which a woman is capable of. This day gives the world the opportunity to celebrate this capability. 

Senior Citizens: Older Women In Society

How is older women's access to the city different from that of their younger counterparts? To our surprise, we found that older women's concerns were overlooked not just by city planners while conceptualizing public places, but also in the feminist and academic discourses on public spaces.

Women's access to public spaces is limited. But gender is not the only determination of reduced access; while examining Mumbai's public spaces with regard to safety for women for the Gender and Space project at Mumbai-based Partners for Urban Knowledge, Action and Research (PUKAR) we realised that our study predominantly focused on younger women. But surely age further curtails women's mobility and increases isolation and vulnerability. We began, therefore, to question how older women's access to the city would differ from their younger counterparts. To our surprise, we found that older women's concerns were overlooked not just by city planners while conceptualizing public places, but also in feminist/academic discourses on public spaces. 

It is not that older women alone are marginalised. Older men and children also get pushed onto peripheral spaces. Class, caste, gender and age too are factors that shape people's interaction with public spaces. But we at PUKAR became interested in seeing how the elderly, specifically older women, experience the city. 

Over six lakh senior citizens live in Mumbai. But the only time one hears of them is when there is a murder, suicide or when a senior is abandoned; little newsprint space is given to the elderly otherwise. Much like the selective media reportage of violence against women in public spaces, senior citizens merit attention only when an untoward event occurs. But there are differences too. Contrary to violence against women - that is always depicted in public spaces - violence against the elderly is usually confined within the four walls of a home. Their daily trials and tribulations receive no attention. While violence against senior citizens is not proportionately higher than against other groups; acts of aggression against them are exaggerated by the media, thus further exacerbating their fear.

We interviewed 20 participants from the city, and conducted two focus groups discussions at Andheri and Chembur. A majority of our participants were healthy, physically active men and women, aged between 60 to 70 years. The study sought to map the access of the elderly to public spaces by looking at what their daily routine was, the role public transport played in making their access easier, and whether nana-nani parks, introduced in 1999 with the intention to provide seniors with their 'own' spaces in the city, really offered them an alternative. 

For nearly all the participants nana-nani parks provided a space to interact and make new friends. Such parks also provided space for laughter and yoga clubs, and senior citizens' associations that organize occasional weekend gatherings and excursions. While most nana-nani parks in Mumbai are open to all age groups, two parks, the Girgaum Chowpatty nana-nani park and the Aji-Ajoba park at Dadar are reserved exclusively for seniors. 

Most participants, however, preferred a park open to all as this gave them an opportunity to interact with all age groups instead of being restricted to the company of their peers. While nana-nani parks do create a space for seniors in the city, they are not necessarily the answer to issues of space and isolation that plague the elderly. Just as compartments reserved for women in local trains do make women's commute easier, but do not ward off instances of harassment and discrimination. Spaces segregated for marginalised groups are a way of recognising their rights to public spaces, but they are not a solution. 

Public transport too needs to be examined to determine the nature of senior citizen's engagement with the city. For women - who are less likely to own a vehicle than men - traveling by public transport is a more important option. Most women said they prefer to travel by bus, cabs and autorickshaws as opposed to trains, which they found difficult to negotiate. "Though there is reservation for seniors in Western, Central, and Harbour lines, most seniors find the time (11 to 1 pm and 3 pm to 4.30 pm) clashing with their recreation hours and too inconvenient to commute," informs John Thattil, regional director, HelpAge India. "Similarly few seniors take advantage of the reservation in buses. They feel embarrassed to ask someone to vacate the seat," he adds. Research shows that the elderly are more likely to be pedestrians and users of public transport. 

Age and gender 
Another area of interest for us related to the impact of age on gender issues. Thattil insists that age is an equaliser and women handle aging better than men. But what is important to note is that with age, women's fears only grow. For both men and women the threat of being attacked or robbed is a prime concern. However, women tend to harbour a greater fear. Also the fear of sexual violence does not fade away with age. Women still grapple with harassments like being nudged in a crowded bus, though they may not be a target of catcalls and lewd songs. While some said that age had reduced the threat of sexual harassment and given them greater mobility, others felt that deteriorating health rendered them hapless of defending themselves in case of an attack. As one participant said, factors like poor street lighting and deteriorating eyesight also deterred them from accessing public spaces at night. 

Most women argued that they saw no reason to be out at night; like younger women they agreed that staying out at night was perceived to be 'asking for trouble'. Women, unlike men, feel forced to justify their presence in public spaces, and more so at night as their being out of the house without a 'legitimate purpose' is looked upon distrustfully and raises questions their 'respectability'. 

Poorer women 
Unlike their affluent and middle-class peers, women living in slums have limited access to public spaces and do not see the distinction between private and public spaces as clearly as middle and upper class women. Slum dwellers are compelled to live out their most private moments in public. Public spaces like nana-nani parks also often have an entrance fee, which though nominal is still unaffordable for them. While the parks do not reserve rights of admission, their presence will definitely not be welcomed by seniors who use these parks. Movie shows in multiplexes and weekend picnics organized by senior citizens' associations are luxuries they simply can't afford. Their inability to be one in the crowd further marginalises, isolates and subjugates them within the parks. 

On the other hand, poorer women did not suffer the feelings of loneliness as much. All the poor women interviewed for the study worked for a couple of hours daily, and had the additional responsibility of tending to grandchildren. Their little free time was spent with the family and the community members, who usually belonged to the same village. 

Marital status 
Women's access to public spaces also depends upon their marital status, in addition to class. Household chores often prevent married women - of all ages - from keeping late hours. Older married women however claim that they now go out more often owing to freedom from social responsibilities that age brings. Thus, their access to public space has definitely increased. Unmarried or widowed older women, on the other hand, have less access to space compared to their married counterparts, partly owing to the lack of company. But even they agreed that the presence of nana-nani parks and senior citizens' associations has made aging definitely less lonely. 

In contrast to men and women living independently or in joint families, the elderly who live in old age homes have less mobility. "Most elderly living in old age homes are either abandoned or can't support themselves," states Thattil. In most old age homes there are timings that regulate their movements, and the elderly usually are not allowed to venture out without an escort. Access of inmates to public spaces or interaction with the outside world is thus limited or almost nonexistent. In fact an old age home in Bandra that I visited treats its elderly women like truant children, who need to be disciplined. They are pushed out of bed early for morning mass, and have fixed recreation timings after which they can't even watch television. The lights are switched off at a fixed hour and food is served at a fixed time too. There is little realisation that the elderly, like the rest of us, cherish independence and freedom and don't want to be hemmed in. 

The concerns that older women face in the city are thus manifold. At the same time, many of their concerns are not particular to their age or gender, and addressing them - often requiring only minimal investments - will have broad gains for all citizens. Making the city safe for older women would make the city safe and accessible for others too. Better street lighting, lower bus steps, paved sidewalks, broad, unchipped steps on foot-over-bridges and usable public toilets - these would benefit many others, including children, the physically challenged, and pregnant women.

Special Report: Personal Laws: A Muslim 'Reality Check'

By M H Ahssan / INN Bureau

Fragmentation of religious authority, greater debate and dissent within communities, and increasing literacy and awareness among women have transformed the landscape of personal laws and made the old debate over a uniform civil code largely irrelevant. 

In July 2013, Mumbai’s first Sharia Court was set up. Contrary to the images this might convey, this particular Sharia court is for women, will be run by women and was set up by the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Aandolan (BMMA).

Women Scorned, But Indian Politicians See No Hell's Fury

By Prajit Saxena (Guest Writer)

Another Women’s Day has come and gone, but India, the world’s largest democracy, is yet to resolve the vexing issue of the Women’s Reservation Bill, the one instrument that was expected to set the benchmark in terms of giving a political voice to the women of this country. This, even as both the outgoing government and Opposition kept taking turns to claim that they are keen to see more women in Parliament. For some unexplained reason, there has been no resolute move from either side even as undue haste has been shown, at least from the side of the government, to get the likes of Lokpal Bill passed.

Changing Scenarios… Women’s Lib to Men’s Lib!

By Naira Yaqoob (Guest Writer)

To say that there is nothing constant as change would be to pronounce but the obvious. World has changed, life has changed, people have changed. In this changing scenario who gets the time to ponder over certain issues which affect the lives of not all- but few? If we take some time to be in solitude, to be near nature, to be with God, maybe we will realize the meaning of our life- who we are, why we have been created and what we are expected to do. Beside work, studies, or entertainment in which we mostly indulge into, there is more to life than that. Our grey cells are not only meant for such activities but also to think about things, which are not apparent or discover things that are left undiscovered.

Why 'Indian Women' Still Ignored?

With current uproar over gangrape, 'ignored' women's issues have taken a centrestage in national politics.

It's December 23. India Gate is a sea of about a 2,000 sloganeers. Deep in the midst of a large group of students who hold aloft the banner of All India Students Association (AISA), their former president, the slender Kavita Krishnan, is in full flow. It is an echo of her speech outside Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit's house that went viral: "We cannot disregard politics as insignificant, we do need to talk about politics. There is a culture in our country that justifies rape, that defends the act. If we are to change any of this, we need to politicise the issue. The Government has to listen." There is an applause, and some students shout "raise your voice against Sheila Dikshit" or "fight for women to be free".

Krishnan, a former leader of the radical students' organisation AISA, is now secretary of All India Progressive Women's Association (AIPWA), a group affiliated to the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (CPIML). In a well-appointed home in Lutyens' Delhi, Meira Kumar, speaker of the Lok Sabha, can hear the gathering storm. She was one of the first to visit Safdarjung Hospital to meet the Delhi gang rape victim's family. She went to their one-bedroom home in suburban Delhi too, and her voice breaks as she recalls the mother saying, "Hamari haisiyat hi kya hai? Namak aur roti khate hain bachchon ko padhana ke liye (What financial standing do we have? We eat roti with salt so that our children can study)." She knows that something changed forever this December. "Women's issues will no longer be brushed aside to be handled by women. They have come centrestage and will remain there."

Whether it is the unstoppable rage against the gang rape, the rising resentment against male politicians with loose tongues and sexist minds, or the zero tolerance for entertainment that incites violence, women have decided that personal is no longer private. It is public, and political. In 2013, the Government will no longer be able to turn away from reform of women's laws, many of which are pending, such as Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill, 2010, and the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2012, which relate to acid attacks and sexual assault. The Delhi gang rape protests were not entirely led by women's groups, but they formed a large part. Clearly, protests need to be politicised. Women's voting has declined. In 2009, of the total 58 per cent who voted, 45 per cent were women. In 2004, of the 58 per cent who voted, 53 per cent were women. Yet the number of women being elected to the Lok Sabha is on the rise. The 15th Lok Sabha has the highest ever percentage of women MPs, 58, at 11 per cent.

Women have shown the power of their anger before. Mothers who lost their daughters to dowry deaths came out on the streets of Delhi to protests against dowry. The result was the amendment to the Indian Penal Code, to include Sections 304B and 498A, which acknowledge harassment and cruelty by husbands and his relatives for dowry.

This time, the movement is demanding not just a revision to rape laws. It is asking for the onus to be on society to keep its women safe. As one of the many slogans out there on the cold December nights said: 'Don't tell us how to dress. Tell your sons not to rape.' This time, the women's movement, disparate though it may be, has learnt to give it back in the same coin in which it is attacked, using the language of offence. Thus, Slut Walk Delhi, a Facebook group with 15,982 likes and 28,000 shares started by Delhi University students Trishla Singh and Umang Sabarwal, or Dented and Painted, created after Abhijit Mukherjee's ill-advised comment, with a picture of a faceless woman wearing a tank-top emblazoned with the legend, 'Dented and Painted'. Or the Ban Honey Singh petition started by writer Kalpana Misra, 52, from Delhi, to the general manager of the Bristol Hotel in Gurgaon to cancel the singer's performance on New Year's Eve. It collected 2,500 signatures in less than 12 hours after Misra posted it late on the night of December 30 in protest against his deeply misogynistic lyrics.

Suddenly the cry is: Save Women, Save India. There are many who see this awakening as temporary, or even limited. Activist and novelist Arundhati Roy went on BBC'S Radio 4 to say that the reason this crime is creating so much outrage is "because it plays into the idea of the criminal poor, like the vegetable vendor, gym instructor or bus driver actually assaulting a middle class girl" (which is not strictly true). And that rape is seen as a "matter of feudal entitlement" in many parts of the country (which is true).

She also said that attitudes towards women need to change in India, because a change in the law alone will protect middle class women, but "the violence against other women who are not entitled will continue". Indeed, preventing violence against all women, and all kinds of violence, is the ambitious long-term goal of this movement. As Ayesha Kidwai, JNU professor and member of its JNU'S gender sensitisation committee against sexual harassment, points out, young women on the street have broadened the debate on rape. Instead of just speaking about sexual assault, they have tried to establish that there is a chain-sexual harassment, an institutional and public tolerance of sexual harassment, and an incitement to sexual violence.

The demand for such sweeping reform is a challenge for governance. Governments are used to dealing with vote banks, not issue banks. Doles are easy, details are not. What if women do form vote banks? BJP spokesperson Nirmala Sitharaman doesn't see it happening. Women belong to various religions and castes. They are yet to unite for the sole reason that they are women. Can it happen that they will look beyond their birth markers?

Perhaps. For the first time, issues considered marginal or even taboo are being discussed and debated: A woman's right to her body, security in public spaces, young people's right to aspire to a life beyond their dreams. One of the most moving aspects of the gang rape victim's family was that her father had sold a piece of land in their village to finance her education-not her marriage, as would be commonly expected. Only such family reform can create change-after all, 94 per cent of rapists are known to the victims. Beyond a point, governments cannot alter mindsets that allow female foeticide or dowry demands. Historically, despite embarrassing blips like CPI(M) MLA Anisur Rahman's comments on Mamata Banerjee, the Left has tried to be progressive in its attitude towards women. Leftist students' organisations, most with strong women leaders in Delhi, have no intention of allowing this movement to peter out. On New Year's Eve, AISA organised a protest in the central park at New Delhi's Connaught Place, aimed at "reclaiming spaces" for women. There will be more such public acts of assertion in 2013, posing a challenge for conventional policing.

In a political environment in which men try hard but fail to disguise their innate scorn for women in public life, and women try hard to fit in, will women's issues remain national concerns to be relegated to the margins again? Cynics point to the Women's Reservation Bill and the 16 years it has spent in cold storage despite the blessings of the most powerful woman leader in India. But the protests against corruption in 2011, and the rage against the gang rape of 2012, have created a new empowered citizen. He or she is led by conscience, not straitjacketed by any ideology, is connected to the world, and is armed with technology. Organising a protest is no longer a matter of hiring trucks, printing posters and buying food. It can be a group on Facebook which trends on Twitter and then gathers momentum through BlackBerry Messenger. Today's youth demand day-to-day democracy, not once in five years.

Women were at the centre of the recent US presidential battle between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in November 2012. About 55 million unmarried women were eligible to vote in this election, and Romney's rigid views on abortion made them flock to the Obama camp. More women than men turned out to vote (53 per cent turnout for women and 47 per cent for men). Fifty-five per cent of the women voted for Obama, while only 44 per cent voted for Romney. Not surprising, because he wanted to take back the hardfought control over their bodies with his outdated views on abortion. And not surprising when his Republican colleagues Todd Akin of Missouri and Richard Mourdock of Indiana shocked everyone with their views on rape, saying pregnancy from rape was "something God intended". Both lost the elections to the US Senate.

There's a moral there for the Indian politician who dismisses the dentedand-painteds and the thumke walis. They don't just have a voice but also a vote.

Women Labours: 'Everywhere, Yet Invisible'

Does participatory development result from the actions of local groups themselves, or is it shepherded by NGOs? A documentary film on migrant women labourers explores their coping strategies against poverty and restricted roles, as well an NGO's efforts on their behalf. Mahita notes Women Builders' sensitive and unsentimental portrayal. 

The lot of unskilled labourers is generally a hard one, but hardest for women, who often do not receive legitimate wages, or get complete access to those earnings once home. Not only do they earn less than their male counterparts, if they work as part of a family unit, they frequently do not get paid at all. Most of them are employed on a project-by-project basis, and have no insurance against periods of unemployment, because their work belongs to the unorganised sector. Existing legal regulations (Abolition of Contract Labour Act, 1971), which provide women labourers with maternity benefits, are seldom enforced. 

A large proportion of these unskilled women workers tend to be migrants and thus, seasonal labourers, who are rarely given sickness or even accident benefits. These migrant workers often lack access to clean drinking water or facilities for bathing, not to mention any means of caring for their children when they are at work. They are also vulnerable to police harassment, since their civil rights are not recognised. 

How should development efforts tackle the problems of these women, who suffer the debilitations of poverty more than any others? The last decade has witnessed a growing consensus among development practitioners about the correct approach towards poverty alleviation: they stress that instead of being top-down, the process should be participatory and collective. This vision, advocated by NGOs and governments alike, is a noble but problematic one. Does collective action truly evolve from local women's groups, or is it marshalled and shepherded by NGO intermediates? Are NGOs themselves outsiders? Do they recognise the self-help strategies local communities have already evolved? 

These questions are taken up in Women Builders, a thought-provoking new documentary on women labourers in Chhattisgarh - labourers who are as yet not unionised but might soon be encouraged to act collectively by institutions like the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the International Federation of Building and Wood Workers (IFBWW). 

When so much hype surrounds the 21st-Century working woman and her purchasing power, it is instructive and chastening to dwell on the lives of these women, who also inhabit the working world, but in a completely different capacity. Women Builders was commissioned by the ILO in consultation with the IFBWW and produced by Jandarshan, a community filmmaking unit based in Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Following a screening organised by the Oxford Ethnographic Film Society, I had a chance to speak with the film's producer, Margaret Dickinson. It was Dickinson who, along with course leader Stephen Jinks (of Sheffield Independent Film and Television) and NDTV cameraperson Natasha Badhwar, trained the twelve students who now comprise the staff of Jandarshan. 

  The first half of the film depicts the lives of four women working at a building site in Chhattisgarh, while the second portion examines the impact of the organising activity carried out by two Gujarat-based NGOs, Self-Employed Women's Association (SEWA) and Bandhkam Mazdoor Sangathan. SEWA has 20000 members who work in the construction industry. It arranges for them to get accident insurance; it also trains women in masonry, so that they can weather the impact of job losses which are expected to increase with the growing mechanisation of the industry. Despite this training, contractors rarely hire women to perform skilled work. Nevertheless when women labourers do break through this barrier, their prospects improve significantly, as happened in the case of one SEWA-trained woman, who doubled her salary when she began working as a bricklayer. 

The breadth of SEWA's work does not, however, extend into the sphere of migrant women workers, arguably the worst-off casual labourers. Bandhkam Mazdoor Sangathan is one of few organisations which tries to help these women. In addition to standing up for their rights when they face police intimidation, they also provide them with basic amenities like drinking water and bathing facilities, as well as education for their children. 

The two-fold structure of the film - it is both a portrait of four women working on building sites, and a commentary on the efforts of NGOs to organise them - means that the two narratives can seem disconnected. If the first section is a collection of human stories, focussing on the lives and histories of these women, the second half owes its premise to the film's genesis as a commissioned work. Despite the involvement of the ILO and IFBWW, Women Builders takes a rather provocative look at the role of NGOs and collective action in bringing social justice to these women. 

The film's structure means that, having come to appreciate and admire the self-reliance and resilience of its protagonists, the viewer also contemplates the NGOs portrayed from their perspective. The distance between the two worlds becomes especially apparent in a sequence depicting Indian and foreign delegates at an international conference on women's labour organised by SEWA. As they present papers (in English) on necessary legislation to protect women labourers and guarantee their rights, the women who are the focus of this entire debate look bemused, and often, bored. Obviously, organisations like SEWA play an important role in improving the lives of women labourers, and Dickinson is quick to brush aside any suggestion that the documentary might undermine their effort. 

Nonetheless, she keenly emphasises that "there is solidarity and a strategy amongst those working together, despite the absence of collective organisation". Indeed, one of the most inspiring moments in the film occurs when a few women address their mobility difficulties by saving enough to purchase their own bicycles. Although many of these women are primary wage earners in their families, coping with the chronic unemployment that afflicts their husbands, in cases where both spouses are working, the women often establish informal babysitting arrangements with their neighbours, paying stay-at-home mothers to watch over their children. The over-riding impression is of a group of women who are aware of their own needs, and have the initiative and intelligence to fulfil them, finances permitting. By taking matters into their own hands, they themselves make a difference to their lives. 

Part of the filmmaker's brief was to make a film which would be "useful to those working with women labourers". That said, Dickinson admits that screenings of the film before members of the IFBWW and the ILO evoked a mixed response. The ILO collaborator, Jill Wells, liked the film, and Dickinson elaborates, "we agree about the value of collective organisation and unionisation but it is not the be-all and end-all, and so, whatever people can do on a smaller scale is to be encouraged". The IFBWW associate, Fiona Murie, was not as receptive to the film's conclusions. Dickinson recalls, "her attitude suggested a certain criticism because it didn't show enough of the IFBWW". 

More importantly, most of the women who were interviewed were also shown the film. The original plan was to show the film on the building site, but when contractors raised a fuss about the women missing working hours, the programme had to be moved to a community hall in the evening, which made it harder for the women involved to attend. Although unable to go to that screening herself, Dickinson says that she heard that the women expressed a great deal of interest in the first half, which focussed on their lives, but showed surprisingly little curiosity about the second section (perhaps they too felt as detached from the goings-on as their counterparts in Gujarat). She feels that this might have had little to do with their attitude to the subject matter per se. It was more likely, she says, that they found it "difficult to read the subtitles (from Gujarati) fast enough" and were distracted with pressing domestic duties awaiting them at home. 

Keen not to exclude the women and their perspective from the finished film, she responds sharply when I bring up the recent controversy surrounding Zana Briski's Oscar-winning documentary, "Born into Brothels", on the children of prostitutes in Calcutta. Feted largely in the West, Briski has faced much more resistance from Indian film critics and NGOs for her perceived self-importance and condescension towards the society she depicts. When I ask Dickinson if the outsider/insider conflict is an issue in her work, she replies that it is certainly something she is aware of, and to that end, has always worked with all-Indian crews. "But", she continues, "I think the Indian press pick too heavily on it. Jandarshan did another film on a tribal project by a foreign student who lived in a village for two years. I think, having lived in that environment for so long, she would be likely to have a better view of that reality than say, an Indian journalist coming down from Delhi". 

Describing the details of her own work, she says that her crew worked hard to gain the trust of the protagonists, many of whose male colleagues were initially suspicious of the film-makers' motives, believing them to have a prurient interest in focussing on women. She explains that prior to filming, one of the Jandarshan trainees, Ajay T.G., spent a lot of time taking photographs of the women, who "liked this, because they couldn't afford pictures themselves". No one had filmed them before, and Dickinson says she wanted to create "a non-victim portrait, and highlight their energy and competence". 

Despite the presence of tragedy in so many lives - one of the women profiled left primary school to start work because her mother died, another works to provide for her paralysed husband, yet another young woman is victim to an unhappy marriage - this is not a tragic portrait. Their lives are difficult but they cope. When I point out that the film opens with a woman directly addressing the director, and querying why he is filming her, Dickinson adds, "yes, the woman at the start of the film is sharp and thoughtful, like many. You know, they are undaunted women, despite their difficult lives. I wanted to show their condition, without making them into victims". 

The documentary appears to make a deliberate effort to reveal certain positive elements in their lives - for example, showing them eating together irrespective of caste differences. When I bring this up, she says that she wanted to illuminate the complexities in their lives: the complexities generated as a result of moving from village to city in search of work. She elaborates, "there is a certain romanticism associated with village life, (we) tend to lament when people have to leave their village, whereas it can be quite restrictive for women, especially on caste grounds. I wanted to show how being in a town changes some things for the better, by breaking some of those barriers". 

This impression of women working together in a spirit of solidarity is what the viewer leaves with: an awareness of the strong bonds formed through their shared experiences as labourers. It remains to be seen if this sense of community can be expanded - either through their own initiative or through processes of collective action - to empower them even further. Women Builders is a sensitive, yet unsentimental view of a social group that is very present and all too absent at the same time: they provide the backbone to our buildings, but remain unrecognised and unrewarded for their contribution. For giving us a glimpse of this reality, as well as for its provocative take on the question of collective action and social improvement, it deserves to be seen.