“Arrey kalmuhi kab tak mere kaleje pe bojh ban kar baithegi”. Statements like this are quite evident in Indian society whenever we talk of women as a burden. And to top it all, the concept of dowry has sparked the flames and is continuing to subordinate women in the society today. Dowry or Dahej is the payment in cash or/and kind by the bride's family to the bridegroom’s family along with the giving away of the bride. To trace back the history of dowry, it originated in the upper class families as a symbol of gifts given to the bride by her family. This later got converted as a sort of a help in marriage expenses and a sort of “stree dhan” which could be later used by the girl in the time of crisis. Although, this practice has been legally banned in India since 1961 but it continues to be in great practice. The situation today is such that the groom and his family demand dowry in the nature of hard cash, electronic items, furniture, cars, house and the list is never ending.
The Indian society can be characterized as extremely duplicitous. We are a bunch of hypocrites who say something else and mean something else. On one hand, we equate women to the three goddesses, i.e. goddess of power, wealth & intellect an on the other hand we go on to weigh these women in comparison with gold, silver and sometimes even hard cash. If a bride is not able to fulfill the dowry demands of her in-laws then it is her who has to face the brunt of humiliation in the family. In few cases, situations go to the level of “Bride Burning” and in very few cases; women actually come out of their homes courageously to fight against the evil. It is quite evident that there exists a huge amount of prejudice against women in the Indian society. It is these practices that make repress women in the society today. It doesn’t let women grow from her original position. Today, women are doing so well that in many areas they are performing better than men. Then why is dowry symbolizing women as a burden on her parents?
But my question is not what and how of dowry. I wish to bring a different issue in front of everyone today. We have been hearing the term commodification from a long time now. And every time we hear this word, what comes to mind is a skimpily clad woman modeling for a bike or a car or maybe an alcohol brand. But is commodification restricted to women? Aren’t men being commodified in a very invisible manner? Something which they don’t even realize is happening to them. A sort of a “reverse commodification’?
In the Hindu marriage, the parents of the bride give huge amounts of gifts, sometimes cash and other items as ‘dahej” to the bridegroom, which means they are paying a sum for the bride groom. To look at it from the other angle, the parents of the bride groom are happily demanding and accepting dowry and selling off their sons. Which comes to mean that they have simply “commodified” their sons? I mean just come to think of it. The groom’s family makes note of the amount of money being spent from his diapers to his drugs converting him to a mere commodity who is being sold for a price much more than the actual cost price. The only difference here is that the bride’s parents have to loose on both their daughter as well as the huge amount of money spent on dowry.
Let’s look at the lighter side of the picture. In many states in India, the dowry rates vary depending upon the level of education and occupation of the boy. So if a boy is a bureaucrat then the bride’s parents have to be well equipped to pay as high as one million rupees. So considering the fact that marriage today is a market and the grooms as per their levels of occupation are characterized according to the big brand names. For example, the bureaucrats can be characterized by Shoppers Stop, MBA’s by Westside, doctors by Globus, Engineers by Levis and so on. So the concept is that the prospective bride can go to the brand name that suits her taste and pocket and pay a certain amount of money and buy the groom forever. Wow…this indeed sounds interesting. As a feminist, it gives me immense pleasure to think that men who don’t stop commodifying women are in the end commodified by their own families and sometimes by themselves.
Which means all we need today is money? Well, to look at the brighter side of the picture, women are quite self sufficient today. In the past few years, many cases have proved that women can’t be subordinated on the issues of female infanticide, foeticide, purdah and especially dowry. But the need is still to bring awareness for those women who continue to suffer subordination, being afraid of the fact that life outside maybe worse than what they are actually going through. The need is also to teach those women a lesson that becomes a helping hand in spoiling the lives of their daughter in laws by instigating their sons.
Are we justifying Marxian concept of class struggle here? Are we the women the “have nots” and the Men the “haves”? And thus it is the exploitation of the dominant on the oppressed? Then let me warn you my dear patriarchs that Marx talks of something called “revolution”, when the exploited class rises up in revolt to overthrow the dominant class. Is it then that this brutal system of patriarchy would realize the pain and agony that they have inflicted upon the women since time immemorial? Let us just hope that this society brings about a change in itself without a sort of revolution. Let us be optimistic and work towards the achievement of a society that is marked by gender equality, where women are free to speak for themselves. It is then can we expect our country to progress. Only then can we feel secured about this country being a better place for our future generation of daughters to come. It is then can a girl’s parents happily think of getting their daughter married without having to spend huge amounts of money on dowry and the daughter in law receiving full respect from her husband and her family. My eyes are already waiting to experience such a society. Let us just hope I am fortunate enough to experience it before the doors of heaven open up to receive me in the world where there is no state, no society and thus no inequality.
