If you are a professional in an emerging industry, like gaming, data science, cloud computing, digital marketing etc., that has promising career opportunities, this is your chance to be featured in #CareerKiPaathshaala. Fill up this form today!
In a patriarchal and restrictive move, Nepal has 'banned' the travel of women without familial consent. When will this discrimination end?
In a patriarchal and restrictive move, Nepal has ‘banned’ the travel of women without familial consent. When will this discrimination end?
According to a report in The Guardian, the women in Nepal are protesting a proposed law. This law bans women under the age of 40 from travelling abroad without the consent of family members or a local ward office.
On 12th February 2021, a women’s march was organised in Kathmandu. This was a part of the ongoing Brihat Nagrik Andolan – a campaign for justice, equity and democracy.
The campaign saw a large number of participants including students and artists. They chanted ‘Justice justice justice!’ in the names of all the victims of violence and called out to put an end to discrimination against women.
A report in The Kathmandu Times suggests that the proposed law by the Department of Immigration is patriarchal and preposterous. It is a law that makes it mandatory for women under 40 years to take consent from their family to fly abroad on travel visas!
However, the restriction on female migrant workers originated around 35 years ago. That’s when the Government of Nepal imposed a law that said, women, are required to obtain the consent of a ‘guardian’ (parent/husband/any relative) to go for foreign employment.
In 2012, Nepal enforced a law that banned women under the age of 30 from travelling to the Middle East for work. The ban was a response to several publicised cases of abuse of Nepali domestic workers. This included unpaid wages, gruesome work hours, and in some cases physical or sexual abuse.
However, in 2016, the ban was eventually lifted partially but proper regulations were never formulated to benefit women. And now in 2021, the issue remains the exact same. The only difference being the age restriction which has been increased to 40 years.
Several years of this protectionist mindset towards women migrant labourers has only exposed them to seeking perilous routes to work abroad. This puts them at severe risk of trafficking and exploitation.
Instead of providing them with safer and more stringent measures, the law yet again brings to light the regressive thoughts of the people. Laws like these only deprive them of their basic rights and autonomy over their lives.
According to a report by the Nepali Times, a ban like this removes the urgency to address the root cause of vulnerability. It further promotes pervasive protectionist norms and stigmas that are regressive and more enduring.
A former National Human right commissioner Mohna Ansari, tweeted, “Stop taking decisions for women. The prevalence of patriarchal mindset /madness may allow you to show your misogynist concerns but controlling women just because you are in power is sheer impiety towards the entire gender, you don’t speak for us, you can’t control us.” She also said the rules would violate “constitutional provisions that guarantee equal and fair treatment of all citizens and call for ending gender-based discrimination.”
While the abuse of migrant workers, including women, poses serious problems, these policies only make it worse. Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said the current proposals could “force women into riskier, undocumented employment, increasing the danger of trafficking and abuse.”
Ganguly said the government ‘Should better regulate recruitment agencies, work with destination country governments to put protections in place, and respond effectively to provide protection services when abuses occur.’
According to the annual human trafficking report of the National Human Rights Commission for 2018-19, nearly 35,000 Nepali citizens, (15,000 men, 15,000 women, and 5,000 children were trafficked during the period). This data was compiled when the government ban on Nepali women for taking up housemaid jobs in the Gulf region was still on.
The new proposed law is still a reflection of how the laws are reformed by a deeply rooted patriarchal mindset and society. However, the protest by the women is evidence that today women may not just give up easily on their fundamental rights of living.
Picture credits: Still from Free Press Journal’s YouTube channel
A research scholar, A house-maker, A mother, and playing all the possible roles a woman could play at 34. But above all, I am a wanderer who is often entangled in her own mind read more...
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
Shows like Indian Matchmaking only further the argument that women must adhere to social norms without being allowed to follow their hearts.
When Netflix announced that Indian Matchmaking (2020-present) would be renewed for a second season, many of us hoped for the makers of the show to take all the criticism they faced seriously. That is definitely not the case because the show still continues to celebrate regressive patriarchal values.
Here are a few of the gendered notions that the show propagates.
A mediocre man can give himself a 9.5/10 and call himself ‘the world’s most eligible bachelor’, but an independent and successful woman must be happy with receiving just 60-70% of what she feels she deserves.
Darlings makes some excellent points about domestic violence . For such a movie to not follow through with a resolution that won't be problematic, is disappointing.
I watched Darlings last weekend, staying on top of its release on Netflix. It was a long-awaited respite from the recent flicks. I wanted badly to jump into its praise and will praise it, for something has to be said for the powerhouse performances it is packed with. But I will not be able to in a way that I really had wanted to.
I wanted to say that this is a must-watch on domestic violence that I stand behind and a needed and nuanced social portrayal. But unfortunately, I can’t. For I found Darlings to be deeply problematic when it comes to the portrayal of domestic violence and how that should be dealt with.
Before we rush to the ‘you must be having a problem because a man was hit’ or ‘much worse happens to women’ conclusions, that is not what my issue is. I have seen the praises and criticisms, and the criticisms of criticisms. I know, from having had close associations with non-profits and activists who fight domestic violence not just in India but globally, that much worse happens to women. I have written a book with case studies and statistics on that. Neither do I have any moral qualms around violence getting tackled with violence (that will be another post some day).