“Committed to the cause of women” is the phrase you encounter frequently when you peruse the legislation proposed by the feminist outfits like Lawyers Collective and NCW. You also hear this phrase in the numerous representations made to the authorities by the feminists. Examples include the draft Sexual Harassment bill where the Service Providers “committed to the cause of women” were to be given powers to arbitrate the disputes. Similarly, in the representations made to the Government by the radical feminist outfits like AIDWA and Lawyers Collective, they are demanding filling up the judiciary and the police with officers “committed to the cause of women”.

Questions raised in any thinking individual’s mind when one hears the phrase “committed to the cause of women” include –

1. What is the meaning of “cause of women”? Is it related to women’s advancement in various areas of social life? Is it arming a woman with unchecked power to unleash “legal terrorism” against anyone at her fancy? Is it achieving true gender equality, so women are given equal opportunity to advance in any area of endeavor on par with men? What is the true cause of women?
2. Which particular segment of women’s cause is it? Urban women or rural women? Rich women or poor women? Educated or semi-educated or uneducated? Mothers-in-laws/sister-in-laws or the daughters-in-laws? Live-ins or wives? What if the cause of one segment of women is in direct opposition to the cause of another segment? Which segment’s cause should take precedence?
3. Can the authorities, whether they are in the judiciary or in the executive like the police, who derive their powers from the constitution and democratic institutions, be committed to the cause of one section of the society at the expense of another section of the society?
4. Where should the commitment of an individual who professes to practice a certain profession lie?

The “cause of the women” from the legislation already passed so far, and the legislation proposed, appears to be neither the true advancement of women nor the redress for victimized women, but that of arming an urban, upwardly mobile shrew with unchecked powers to unleash the full force of state machinery on unsuspecting individuals at her fancy. It is that segment of women’s cause that the radical feminists are vociferously advocating and advancing.

Coming to the last two questions raised above, it is obvious an individual’s commitment must lay towards the cause of the profession he or she professes to practice and not towards one section of the citizenry at the expense of the other. This is particularly applicable in professional matters, no matter what his or her private opinions or viewpoints may be.

For example, there is a doctor in your town who is “committed to the cause of women”. She routinely administers incorrect medicines to her male patients, often causing death and disability, because of her belief that all men are abusers of women. Would you condone such a doctor? Would you be willing to send your son, your father or your brother to such a doctor for treatment?

Now imagine that the judicial ranks are filled with judges “committed to the cause of women” and not to the cause of truth, law and justice. What would be the confidence level of a citizen who approaches such a court for justice? What if the accused person in such a court is a female and the victim a male? What confidence could the citizens repose in any judgments delivered from such a court?

In the same way, when police ranks are filled with persons “committed to the cause of women”, instead of to the cause of upholding law, what kind of redress can a citizen expect when approaching such a biased agency?

From the above, it is amply clear that “committed to the cause of women” is not the right commitment for any professional – whether one is a judicial officer, a doctor, a lawyer, the police; or for that matter any other professional.

Then what is the true agenda of the radical feminists when they exhort the authorities for the appointment of officials “committed to the cause of women”?

Their true agenda is an insidious attempt to infiltrate and subvert the sacred institutions of our democratic society, like the judiciary and the law enforcement, from the inside. This phrase “committed to the cause of women”, as innocuous as it may sound, is the most dangerous Trojan Horse let loose on our society by the radical feminists, that all civil society must vigorously guard against.