When the UPA decided to run Pratibha Patil, a former governor of Rajasthan, in the 2007 presidential election, the controversy around the phrase garnered considerable attention. It was the first time that India will have a female president, and “Rashtrapatni” was one of the suggestions made, though it was never really considered.
This time, it wasn’t a government initiative or social programme that sparked a fierce debate in Parliament. When the BJP launched a full-scale attack against Congress MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury for calling President Droupadi Murmu “Rashtrapatni,” the Monsoon Session was shaken. The BJP was not pacified by Chowdhury’s explanation that his use of the phrase was merely a slip of the tongue. The party demanded an apology from Chowdhury and Congress president Sonia Gandhi.
Irani charged that the Congress was “humiliating” the supreme commander of the armed forces by making the claimed derogatory comment. She also charged that the party was anti-Adivasi and anti-women. As both sides levelled accusations of violating parliamentary decorum, the debate quickly became out of control.
There is no denying that Chowdhury’s remarks may have diminished the stature of the office of the President, but they have reignited the discussion over using gender-neutral terminology for constitutional posts.
WHAT ARE THE RECENT DEBATES?
On Thursday, some proponents of women’s rights claimed that over time, in various contexts, some words and phrases have been replaced with more gender-neutral ones. A spokesman has given way to spokesperson, chairman to chairperson, and in cricket batsman for batter.
President is also gender neutral, according to Yogita Bhayana, the president of People Against Rape in India and an advocate for women’s rights. The word “president” has a different meaning when translated into Hindi, but the meaning is still relevant, she claimed. “However, Chowdhury’s remarks were incredibly offensive. I believe he wanted to make a patriarchal message, so he wanted to be extremely precise about gender. We never assessed the former president Pratibha Patil in such a way.
One might consider using gender-neutral language when talking to the president, but Chowdhury made the claim for entirely other reasons. However, in the future, there must be a proper word for the position “said Bhayana to PTI.
Shabnam Hashmi, a social activist and human rights advocate, suggested that the term “president” should be gender-neutral like “chairperson.” “Mantri also doesn’t indicate gender, but there are other connotations involved with the words ‘pati’ and ‘patni,’ “She said.
Some activists, however, contend that because the president is a constitutional post, it is already gender-neutral. The president has the same power and authority regardless of gender, according to social activist and Centre for Social Research director Ranjana Kumari, and it is a constitutional position. “Therefore, I fail to comprehend why confusion exists. But if the government wants to use a phrase that is gender neutral, they can call it “rashtrapradhan.” However, I don’t see why we should consider the term “rashtrapati” to be gender-loaded as “pati” isn’t actually anyone’s husband in this context.
