The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

SOCIAL CROSSCURRENTS
The search for Mr and Ms Right

INTER-caste or inter-religion marriages, though welcome when workable, cannot be treated as a national programme for promoting integration. Marriage is a question of two lives, two people who must seek happiness and security in each other. Caste integration can only come with education, commonality of values and a clear perception of women’s status, says Vimla Patil.

Many among us take pride in being modern. No old-fashioned beliefs for us, we assert. In keeping with this bravado, we reject the guidelines laid down by generations before us in the matter of choosing marital partners. In a pompous bid to break down social barriers, caste and regional barriers or to prove that we are truly secular, we arrange or agree to the marriages of our sons and daughters often with mismatched partners or into culturally and economically unsuitable for the children whom we love so much and whom we have brought up with such devotion. Alertness is necessary in guiding our children in the choice of a life partner or in arranging a match ourselves.

Some time ago famous writer Vijay Tendulkar wrote a play called Kanyadaan. Based on a revolutionary theme, the play was presented on stage by a cast of well-known actors and had many performances in Marathi and Gujarati. The story of this eye-opening play centered around a professor of sociology who was a staunch Gandhian. He believed that all human beings are equal and therefore took special pains to teach the backward class students in his class more carefully than the others. The professor also dabbled in socialist politics and preached equality of all human beings. So when his own daughter graduated, his idealism caused him to consider her marriage with a poet of the Backward Class. He was so impressed by the passionately angry poetry the young man wrote that he thought the fiery revolutionary would make an ideal husband for his daughter. He forgot that his daughter was brought up in a totally different environment. She was no revolutionary. She had been nurtured with love, educated as an equal and brought up in relative comfort. Yet, the professor married off his daughter to the Backward Class poet and felt proud that he had broken all social barriers. Only when the daughter suffered from the drunken beating of her husband night after night did he realise that he had sacrificed his child at the altar of his pompous idealism.

This may merely be the story taken from a play. But very often, such real life drama is played out in many families where even marriages in the same caste play havoc with the lives of young people. This proves that the question of finding Mr Right or Miss Right is not based on caste or religion. It is increasingly based on a common perception of the world, a shared live-view and an acceptable life-plan. Any marriage where religion, a specific culture or even a different variant of culture is forced down the gullet of a young bride or groom, has little chance of being happy, unless one partner surrenders completely. In India, caste or religious differences can also mean different cultures or life-views. Even within the same caste or religion, families view economic freedom or status or education of women or openness in relationship or ambition and economic goals in diverse ways.

It is, therefore, more important to find a suitable man or woman in a suitable family rather than emphasise caste or communities. In many cases, parents or young people themselves marry because of friendship, because there are no demands for dowry through newspaper ads or because a poorer or a less high-profile family wishes to bring home a girl or a boy from a more prestigious family. Very often, trouble ensues because parents do not make adequate enquiries and consider a daughter’s marriage as a ‘duty to be performed’ as soon as a daughter attains marriageable age.

In many such cases, girls who are used to freedom, education and an open family life, are suffocated by a different culture, a lower and less generous standard of living and totally different perceptions of the status of men and women. I have seen the suffering of girls married to alcoholics, drug addicts, chronically jobless men or eternal flirts and also men married to arrogant, lazy, ill-tempered girls.

Many a time, the culprit is an attractive film which sets up totally artificial yardsticks for the man-woman relationship. In an effort to adhere to falsely socialistic government policies or to get films passed quickly through the Censor Board, producers show that a poor girl marrying a rich man or vice versa makes a very romantic marriage. Many films show that after complicated events, a well-to-do, westernised family prefers a desi girl who surrenders her personality totally to them. Other films show rich girls eloping with or falling in love with taxi drivers, garage mechanics or village farmers and marrying them against all family opposition. These films show the couple living happily in a garage or a mountain hut and doing work they are totally unused to, till their families accept them back. The situation is even worse when the lovers shown are in school or college. Children are shown to be so passionately in love that they run away to get married or secretly do get married in a temple in an illegal ceremony.

The truth, however, is very different. A boy or girl, brought up in a generous family, where education, arts, music and a certain cultural environment exists, feels strangulated in a matrimonial family where every rupee is counted; where fine arts are looked down upon as cheap or useless waste of time. A girl who is treated as equal in her home and is encouraged to achieve excellence cannot be happy in a family, which sees women as obedient people who will not do anything without the illiterate elders’ permission. The insults piled on her because of her knowledge or academic excellence and the often-repeated pinpricks to her husband that "he must keep his wife under control" will ultimately ruin the marriage and possibly drive a daughter to suicide.

Dowry is not the only cause of burning brides. A husband’s promiscuity, lack of respect for the girl or her parental family in the husband’s home, a complete change of the standard of living or a loveless life can drive a young, well-loved girl to disaster. The insults piled upon each other’s parents also drive a couple to divorce or disharmony. So though a family may think: "So what if he is very poor, he is well educated." But his basic values will hardly change. "What if he belongs to the Backward Class? He is the new India." We may say, but this may not always be so. "What if he is not rich or successful? He promises to let my daughter achieve all her goals!" We may think like this, but these are often empty dreams which lead to chaos.

Marriages between different religions, different economic classes, totally different values, diagonally opposite status of women are successful not as a rule but only as exceptions; very often, because of the surrender of a woman to the new family. Otherwise, the difference in values, perceptions, eating habits, family background and even ambition can cause her to be victimised till she is but a shell of her original self. Thousands of divorces today take place not all for dowry, but because neither the husband nor his family are willing to support a woman’s career or dreams for a better life.

Witness a quote from Dimple Kapadia who said that her inter-caste marriage to Rajesh Khanna had a three-tier breakdown: (a) break from parents, (b) break from career, and (c) break from all rights. On the other hand, a spoilt vagrant daughter brought into a good home because of her family wealth or name can also ruin herself and her husband’s family. Parents of educated, ambitious daughters and sons, therefore, must remain alert and careful, and properly research the prospective bride or bridegroom irrespective of the caste question. For disaster can strike even after our best efforts to find the ‘ideal’ partner.

Personally, I would say that no girl should marry into a family, which does not respect and welcome her and her family. She should not marry a man who sees women as obedient slaves or worse, brainless idiots who must be ‘kept under control’. Defying all those who love you to marry a person of your choice needs strength because the fight to overcome opposition beats the hell out of young people who are not prepared to lose their families entirely in the Indian milieu.

In today’s stressful life, it is difficult enough to make a go of a marriage even in ideal circumstances. When a couple starts with handicaps, the going is that much more difficult.

A well-known columnist, the writer is former Editor, Femina

Cinderella revisited
Benita Sen

Radhika Menon (name changed) qualified to be a dentist. She made a pretty good one, in fact, and practised in Delhi for three years. Then, her parents arranged her marriage to Avinash, an Army engineer. After a couple of years, Radhika opted out of dentistry to stay at home, with plans to complete a diploma in education on her way to becoming a teacher.

Vivacious Brinda Gupta stood first in her batch, won a scholarship but fell in with her parents’ wishes and married a non-resident Indian who whisked her away to the Caribbean hotel he was working for. Two children and 21 years of marriage later, Brinda flits between scribbling copy part-time for small agencies and writes an occasional story for children.

Menon and Gupta are just some of the sizeable number of women who, after getting married, give up their dreams of professional self-actualisation. There are many justifications for doing this. Says Snigdha Sharma, a Delhi teacher who is a qualified chartered accountant: "I did not have serious dreams of a career." Why, then, did she spend so much of time and money pursuing accountancy? Sharma chooses not to answer this question. Does she realise that not utilising her qualifications is also a national loss? There is silence again.

"It is social conditioning and the family’s rearing practices. These are determined by, and in turn, determine, societal conditioning," shrugs Delhi psychiatrist Dr Sanjay Chugh, husband of a practising ophthalmologist. "During the course of a child’s psycho-social development, the male child is taught through word and action about the dominant male role and the girl child is taught the submissive female role."

Like Monisha Verma, a postgraduate in psychology who picked up a subject in great demand because "it would look good on her personal resume". Her resume, however, was not for a job but the marriage mart. "In most Indian homes even today, a girl’s education is seen only as a passport to her getting a better match," says Chugh. And so, Cinderella fed on glorious visions of her ‘doli’ (bridal palanquin) arriving to fetch her to her new and permanent palace-home, abandons her dream of professional self-actualisation, while her husband and the demands of his family take away the glass slipper.

That, according to Britain’s Professor Jonathan Gershuny of the Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, is the Cinderella reversed or ‘Allerednic syndrome’.

Gershuny’s socio-economic-political context is a little different from ours, but the basic theory is relevant. The transformation of the stagecoach into a pumpkin can begin before marriage when future in-laws ask that the working girl uphold the traditions of their home by giving up her job.

Society as a whole suffers if Allerednic continues. Personally, it is a blow to the psyche of the man whose mate is stifled. Says Amit Ojha, "I was attracted to Sangeeta because she was intelligent, focussed on her studies and had so many interests. After marriage, we relocated and it took her six months to pick up a job. During that time, I was so tired of her small talk and I told her she was becoming boring. She was hurt, but that spurred her on."

Sangeeta feels that this stinging comment was a boon. "I had lost the nerve to look for a new job and had it not been for Amit, I would have withdrawn into the cocoon of our ‘safe’ home," she says. However, not every man is as mature. "Most commonly, the relationship between a husband and a wife is a relationship of unequals," says Chugh. And the husband feels less threatened if it stays that way, although a confident and economically independent woman can contribute in many positive ways to improving their life.

Since men and women share their place in society, it would be unfair to blame the men alone for reducing Cinderella to an Allerednic. The woman who tolerates the first abuse gives the man the message that she is malleable. Moreover, the woman is constrained by her own fears and insecurities, both real and perceived, and by social conditioning. Just as much to blame are a woman’s parents who have not only dinned a certain stereotype into her, but often stand by and watch her ambitions being thwarted.

However, there is a tiny percentage of Allerednics who enjoy relinquishing control over their lives. "It is easier when the man decides. The woman’s achievements can be confined to the safety net of the family rather than having to pitch herself in a competitive job market. Especially, since after marriage, she has the dual challenge of adjusting to a new home and responsibilities she did not have earlier," says Deepika Rai, who gave up a job as a scientist to become a homemaker.

But for those who do not willingly take the back seat, the way out is spirituality or hypochondria, or both, along with alcohol, pills, displacement of anger on helpless children or mindless gossip sessions with other women caught in the same trap.

Social conditioning alone is not to blame. According to Gershuny, in England, it is the ‘Wild West’ situation that adds fat to the fire. This means long working hours, insufficient and sub-standard childcare facilities and consequent gender inequity. The wife, already lagging on the career treadmill as a result of having taken maternity leave, opts out or downscales in order to fulfil domestic responsibilities, and fathers are not yet entitled to paid paternity leave in the UK.

In contrast, is what Gershuny calls the ‘Nice Nordic’ story: A more benevolent and aware State. In Finland, for example, the government appreciates the social need for shorter and adjustable work hours, is generous with leave and encourages decrease in gender segregation. It also encourages more trained skills in subsidiary sectors like childcare, and so, a couple can leave the child with a licensed creche than with a semi-lettered domestic help. The result is a better society with better man-woman relationships and better career inputs from women.

Gradually, in most buoyant economies, the inequity is lessening. Some day, then, society will see a convergence. And men and women will share their place fairly in the sun.— WFS

Should the burqa be worn or not?
Anjum Sayed

In the eyes of many, the Islamic world would appear to stand isolated in the wake of terrorist attacks on America last month. But for the Muslims in India, a far more vexing issue seems to have divided the community: Whether or not the burqa must be worn.

The issue cropped up in August when a little-known militant outfit warned Muslim women in Kashmir that unless they covered up, acid would be thrown on them. Then copycats in Hyderabad started a door-to-door campaign urging women to don burqas. Soon, the Muslim league issued veiled threats in Mumbai...

In effect, fear now grips the Fatimas and Razias who have not known of a dress code in secular India. In several Muslim-dominated areas, women without burqas confess to looking over their shoulders, lest they become targets of attack of some fanatic group.

Some like Farzana Syed of Mumbai’s Aawaaz-e-Nishwaan have gathered the courage to register their protest: "Today, preachers and politicians are telling us what to wear. Tomorrow, they will prohibit us from leaving the house. This is a means to suppress women."

Syed belongs to that liberal fringe among the urban educated who are able to articulate their convictions on women’s rights and emancipation. But given the overall social conditioning of Indian Muslims, such views are not necessarily representative of the community at large.

Even a scholarly Shoaib Sayyad of the Islamic Research Foundation, is opposed to the feminist point of view and feels that not wearing the burqa amounts to an act of seduction: "Promiscuity corrupts the minds of the youth. While we do not believe in acid attacks, it is up to all of us to implement the will of Allah!"

Significantly, most Muslims are unaware of the fact that the Holy Koran makes no imposition on a dress code for women. All it advocates is "decorum" and nowhere does it suggest putting women in a uniform —least of all, a shapeless black polyester costume.

The key verse on this subject, reads thus: "Say to believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty, that they should not display their ornaments, that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty, except to their husbands, fathers and sons..."

Social reformer Asghar Ali Engineer interprets this as a simple directive to women not to display their sexuality. "In its early years, Islam neither veiled nor secluded its women," he explains. "But what needs to be emphasised is that the Koran exhorts men to lower their gaze before women. This was never enforced."

The opposing view draws upon other religious texts, which expect Muslim women to cover the entire body, barring the hands and face. Sayyad adds that according to the rules of hijab, the clothes must not be tight, transparent or glamorous.

Zeenat Shaukat Ali, a professor of Islamic culture, expresses a more tolerant view: "The restriction may offer some relief to women from conservative Muslim families, who, otherwise, would not be able to step out of the house. But by and large, we are programmed to believe that the burqa is a religious duty."

In all these arguments, what has escaped attention is that Muslims have never constituted a homogenous community in India. So while in Uttar Pradesh or West Bengal, burqas are common, in the southern parts, a demurely draped saree pallav or dupatta serves the requirements of an Islamic dress code.

Moreover, in the decades after Independence, the burqa had almost disappeared from urban India. It acquired a small-town, lower middle-class tag till the 1970s when the Gulf boom and the Islamic revolution in Iran gave the garment a new lease of life.

Evidently, Indians holding jobs in West Asia, invariably returned with burqas as presents for their women at home and before long, it became fashionable to sport the imported garment. In time, it was given as wedding gifts, leading many to believe that wearing a burqa is prescribed by religion.

Sociologists point out that the last decade has witnessed a more aggressive trend, particularly among Muslims in Mumbai, who were victims of the communal riots in 1992-93. Even skinny schoolgirls and carefree collegians are opting for the cloaks, fancy scarves, nose-pieces and veils.

"While some women have adopted ‘hijab’ as an assertion of identity, others become victims of social pressures," observes a marriage counsellor. "They are told that the burqa guarantees protection and respect. The Bohra Muslims tell their women to attend community functions in a rida." The rida is a rather colourful version of the burqa. (MF)

READERS' RESPONSE

Striving to break through the glass ceiling

Apropos of Vimla Patil’s article, “Striving to break through the glass ceiling” (October14), there is no doubt that age-old values have changed. With awareness about education, economic development, social consciousness, urbanisation, and more opportunities for work, a change has occurred in the attitude towards women.

A working woman’s position is certainly different from that of a housewife but the attitude and behavour of society towards her as yet, is far from just. Although women have joined almost every profession in our country and most of them are doing excellent work, the working women have to put in a great deal of hard work to reach the top. The Law Ministry’s Department of Company Affairs (DCA) had proposed sometime back that all public limited and joint stock companies should reserve one-fifth of places on their board for women so that they could play “a much greater role in companies in the future by harnessing, not by hiding, their feminine strengths in communication, relationship-building and conflict management.” It was a right step towards removing gender bias and soothing the path to the top. For the career woman it was a good news but it proved to be merely a rhetoric!

In the male-centric workplace, women have realised that the “sensitive” card can be overplayed. This important corporate tool is more often turned into a weapon against them. By conceding that women are suitable for “soft issues”, corporatania implies that they are unsuitable for the hard issues. It is still Lakshmana who draws the defining “rekha and the swivel-chair Sita breaches it only at her peril.

Will you find anywhere near as many women in finance as you would in HRD? In an ideal world, the second is as vital as the first, but in the real one? No.

At a conference on leadership organised by the International Women’s Media Foundation in Washington last year,Gail Evans, Executive Vice-President of CNN, reminded her unempowered audience that “creeping incrementalism is not enough,” that “we have not given ourselves permission to get to the top”, that we must “get out of the safe places and walk into our own fears”, that women must bravely seize the “vision agenda”, not wallow in their skills of micro-management.

Gail Evan’s practical hand book Play like a Man, Win like a Woman lays down 14 rules for playing the game the man’s way:

“Ask, don’t hint, speak out with authority even if not fully conversant, toot your own horn, don’t expect to make friends, accept uncertainty and risks, don’t anguish, don’t assume responsibility without authority, take the seat at the table, not the one by the wall.”

Professional women in India would do well to follow the above directions if they want to arrive at their own destinations.

K.M. Vashisht, Mansa

The effort’s worth it

The article “...and the effort is worth it” by Reeta Sharma (October 14) was quite an eye-opener. It was also an indication of how the grass is also not too green on the other side of fence. Women in India, working at different levels of society believe how their counterparts abroad are leaps and bounds ahead in terms of career opportunities, professionalism and a social acceptance of their standing in the world outside. We also tend to believe that they are just as appreciated outside as they are at home. Obviously, things aren’t all too rosy for them as the article suggests.

In a progressive country like U.K. pointers such as women occupying less than 4 per cent of middle and senior management posts and, worse still, their wages being way less than 30 per cent as compared to what men pocket speaks of a status quo for career women there too. Out here they (working women) are heard crying over sorry working conditions, cribbing over meagre pay checks, cursing the treatment meted out to them at the cost of their self-respect. There is no compensation for the amount of opportunities in terms of promotions and emoluments in terms of a bigger pay packet and benefits they’re fleeced of on the side.

Closer home, working women are sailing in the same boat, rocked by unequal chances insurmountable obstacles and unnerving harassment. Who’s to blame for all this? Male chauvinism and a fragile ego that men display makes it impossible for them to admit how women too have goals besides tending to the kids and doing the laundry. They are hesitant to acknowledge women and their achievements. Is it the rigid tenets of society that push the man outside to be more than a son, husband, father but pull back the lady to carry on being the caring wife, loving mother and an obedient daughter? Why not do something about this aspect and commence by accepting and encouraging women, wherever they are, right away. This will emphasise that their efforts are “worth it”

Amrita. K. Singh, Panchkula

The fact is that women are virtually thwarted in their pursuits because of child birth, a fractured family, a broken marriage or demands of motherhood. There is no doubt that the tussle between motherhood and career ambition and the inherent gender inequality does constitute the glass ceiling. If women prize motherhood or the interests of the family, especially in conference with the culture or tradition enjoined upon them by the society, this is no less an achievement. In that case, women make or tend to be instrumental in making society or even humanity flourish and scale the apex in civilisation. Even then, women do break through the glass ceiling and make civilisation a paragon of goodness and virtue. Though this fact is not generally recognised.

Hans Raj Jain, Moga

III

Girls have to fight opposition from the time they are in the womb, by evading abortion. It is the will and capacity of women which gives them courage and success. They have to struggle to make a place for themselves everywhere— be it in their sasural or in the office. Women break and will go on breaking glass ceilings or walls in every field. Her success is on account of her courage and will power as she has to make a place for herself all the time.

Hari Om Mittal, Ludhiana