So, I was poking around my new MOZILLA FIREFOX browser that I FINALLY downloaded so I could use blogger shortcuts to link (it took two days for the thing to install properly, so I am excited) and it has an option to explore the "latest headlines" so I did, and this was the first one:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6545115.stm
Outrage at India Menstrual Form
"Women civil servants in India have expressed shock at new appraisal rules which require them to reveal details of their menstrual cycles."
This is what we were talking about in class yesterday! Reproductive habits becoming property and business of the government. This information has little bearing on the capability of a woman to do her work, unless she has a medical condition that is in conjunction with her menstrual cycle. Seriously, unless the government starts collecting information for male employees' last erection and subsequent ejaculation (amount of fluid in ccs, etc), they have no right to ask how many tampons a woman goes through in a 28-32 day cycle. Furthermore, isn't menstruation "yucky"? I mean, I give them credit for being able to discuss the matter but, honestly. We don't need to polarize the sexes any more, and requiring reports on menstrual cycles is really opening women up to a certain vulnerability concerning a process on which they have no control. The reason that men would require a report on menstrual experiences is really interesting- they don't get them (and i hope to god they dont WANT a period) and every single reproductively functioning woman gets it. It clearly doesn't affect ability because all women get periods and this sort of levels that playing field, unless there are the aforementioned medical conditions. This will will not evaluate fitness, like the government claims. If these reports show anything, it will be that physically, men and women are not equal, which i hope they already knew. It will just polarize a "physical inferiority" and point out yet another difference between men and women.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I read about this as well and was pretty horrified. To me it seems like the only 'fitness' the government will be measuring (and why do they need to know about fitness anyway unless they are talking about CIA-type government employees) is a woman's 'fitness' for bearing children, which basically brings us back to the very beginning of sexist discrimination. Will they choose not to promote women of childbearing age of good 'childbearing fitness' because they might leave work after they've had a child? Or will they choose not to promote/hire a women of poor 'childbearing fitness' because she will not need the job as badly as a woman with children? Who knows, but the possibilities are frightening.
That's a good point that "childbearing fitness" could serve many frightening possibilites. The first thing that comes to mind is using it as an excuse to hire a younger woman (who would probably require a lower salary because of less work experience, and is perhaps more attractive) than an older woman--especially if neither has kids, or if the older woman already has grown kids.
Even regardless of all that, I don't like that there's a new way to categorize people, to say, "You're this, and you're that, and you're different because of this specific reason." It limits equality and it limits freedom.
i read this article too and was just as appalled as you were. i do not see one how a woman's menstrual cycle is even relevant to getting a job and two (most important) how is it anyone's business???!!! it is a private thing between the woman and maybe her doctor if anyone. I think this is obviously just another way to dominate women. all women as you said, with the exception of medical conditions, get their periods and it does not effect thier job. being hired or fired from a job should not be based on personal things such as menstrual cycles and if someone wants to have a babies in the future (which by the way is an illegal question to ask in an interview in the US) job hiring and firing should be based on whether someone can perform the duties of the job effectively and that is all!
Post a Comment