132 RESERVATIONS FOR WOMEN A gender quota in legislative bodies is controversial. It raises troubling doubts about what it means for a collectivity to be ‘represented’. It challenges our precritical notions of respect for differences between women. It questions our most fundamental allegiances to groups and forces the issue of who we want to be identified with. As a relatively untried political measure, it arouses a mixture of fear and excitement. Thus, the prospect of a gender quota perturbs the open-minded as well as the avowedly partisan citizen. But, on reflection, gender quotas are not as much of a political conundrum as they are made out to be. There is a growing body of political thought that can lead us to greater clarity about the use of gender quotas. There is even considerable evidence from different parts of the world to suggest that gender quotas might be worth betting on. 1 It will be my concern in this paper to offer a defence of gender quotas in legislative bodies. In order to make a convincing case, I shall, at one level, engage with the substantive issues raised in the debates surrounding the potential political and socio-cultural consequences of the institution of a gender quota in the Indian parliament by a constitutional amendment. At a different level, I shall build an argument for a reframing of the debate in terms of concerns of identity and representation. The surprising effect of my reinterpretation is to provide a strong justification for the use of a gender quota in legislative bodies; incidentally, disproving (in a sense) that philosophy leaves everything as it is. Philosophical reflection can bolster our confidence as we juggle our priorities in undertaking the specific Representation for Women Should Feminists Support Quotas? MEENA DHANDA