A recent article by Suman Khadka in the Kathmandu Post, “Of misogynists and bed-warmers” made the challenges women face pretty self-evident. Her article is built around a couple of pieces that have appeared in the Nepali press. Both insinuated that most women members of the new Constituent Assembly were there as a result of their bed-warming and/or love-making capabilities. The two articles she quotes are Nagarik daily Editor Prateek Pradhan’s article and Jainendra Jeevan’s article in The Kathmandu Post.

Khadka articulates her objections, highlighting their weak journalism and misguided intellectualism, with clarity and force:

First is the use of revolting phrases such as ‘bed-warmers’ and ‘mistresses’ to describe women; second are the statements that lovers and ‘mistresses’ were selected without specifying who they are; and third is the generalisation that all women selected under PR fall into one of these categories

In the same article, she also highlights the difference in staking a claim to a word and its usage when she contrasts the approach taken by Nirmala Sharma in her article in Kantipur daily and Bidushi Dhungel’s article in Setopati. The context within which the word “bed-warmer” is being used defines whether it is derogatory. Her stance is that is necessary, if we are to acknowledge the implicit historicity in words.

Misogyny and patriarchal structures in Nepal are evident everywhere, so the generalization of women is not a surprise, it is rather a reflection of the status quo. Indicative of the challenges faced by women are the meagre 10 out of 240 First Past The Post (FPTP) seats that women were able to secure. None of these seats represented the Kathmandu Valley, suggesting an urban culture that reflects the leaders it nominates – all talk, no walk.