Women's Quota makes MPs hate reservations

In secret disclosures made to Sedition and Perdition during insecure, pained and angry moments, several Members of Parliament, all of them incidentally men, made scathing remarks against the idea and philosophy of reservations, of which the women’s quota is a small subset, seeking for an end to this evil move on the start of a new movement based purely on merit.

“We were all set to start this session of Parliament with a business-as-usual-approach, trying to seek out special quotas, exemptions and favours for all of our constituents — farmers, women, youth, big businessmen, criminals — when this evil phrase hit us all — reservations for women in Parliament. It came upon me like a thunderbolt… how evil could it be that I would be stopped from serving my people merely because of my gender?” asked an MP, who has been elected from a reserved constituency for four terms now.

“Where is merit, I ask?” he demanded to know from SedPerd, “if any women can replace me merely because she is a woman? Is this not exploitation, discrimination and anti-merit?”

When SedPerd informed him that reservations have been in vogue in India since 1950, he expressed shock, “God, it can’t be true? Are you telling me this country is standing for it,” he asked.
A group of MPs, all elected to Parliament in succession to their own parents in constituencies reserved on the basis of caste condemned the move, highlighting its dangerous implications to the country. “Just imagine, for decades our family has been grooming this electorate... and suddenly, we can no longer be doing what we do — serve our people. Someone else, just because of being someone disadvantaged by mere birth will take the cake? What incentive will they have to be better when their seats are reserved? Isn’t this evil?”

When informed by SedPerd that they had themselves agitated, fought for and got reservations in the first place, they were shocked. “We did something like that? And none of you did anything to stop us? Then, you are also guilty by omission, let us tell you. How could you allow anything like this to take root as an ideology in our country?”

Some of them, however, sought to justify reservations to all things save Parliament. “Reservations in schools, colleges, government jobs, private sector jobs, police, judiciary, military, sports and all such is one thing… it represents social justice, especially if done by us for the uplift of the downtrodden castes and begets us votes and assured constituencies, but taking the same principle to represent Parliamentarians themselves… this is unacceptable.”

Some opposed the principle of victimhood. “When we get reservations for Dalits, Scheduled Tribes, OBCs, Muslims, Dalit Christians… we are assured of their loyalty and servitude. With women reaching the acme of power, we will lose our hold not just in our constituencies but also within our homes. You think my wife or daughter or daughter-in-law will care to get me a cup of chai anymore.”

“Gender inequality is not the same as caste exploitation. Man has exploited women as a natural right, not the same thing as the upper castes suppressing their fellow men. This must not be the basis for women to become the highest law makers,” they demanded.

However, more MPs are becoming reconciled to the idea that their particular constituency might become reserved for women. “The only saving grace from this evil practice is nepotism and family. I have to work hard to ensure my people remain mine through the services to be rendered by some female relative of mine. Maybe my wife…”

When questioned about the loss versus a revival of a larger merit principle, they conceded that they did not have enough in them to take up such a fight. “We are already a monstrously reserved country. A revival to pure merit and justice is just not possible. The injustice of political might in the name of ‘Special Justice’, be it social or economic, and now gender, is already ruling us. We can’t afford to confront the monster we have created,” they said, pinning their last hopes, across party lines, on the medieval Yadav trio.
“Either they save us from this bill or we will have to do the political equivalent of a gender-changing operation,” they said. “Maybe we will sit at home and read this book you have given us… now, how do you pronounce it… FRANK ENSITEIN?"