nataraj@hou2d.UUCP (A.NATARAJAN) (10/16/85)
On the subject of dowry, some one asked for a
definition. The word "dowry" is defined in English
as money or property brought by a bride to her husband
at the time of her marriage. It is perhaps derived from the Anglo-Norman
usage "dowerie" bearing a similar meaning. The introduction
of dowry in Hindu marriages is an unfortunate mutation of another
practice. As per Vedic Hindu marriage rites,
the bride "kanyaa" is given away
as "daan" to the groom "vara" and the
process is called "kanyaa daan". It is customary
to offer a "dakshina" whenever any "daan"
is given.
As such the groom "Vara" is given a "dakshina" called
"vara-dakshina". The appropriate amount would be of the
order of less than a US dollar, and it is "given" voluntarily
rather than asked for by the groom. This practice underwent a
mutation into the obscene practice of large "dowries".
Kaanchi Kaamakoti Sankaraachaarya Chandrasekharendra Sarasvati
is on record saying that he is so much opposed to the
practice of the modern day "dowry" that he would not want his
name or blessings to be invoked in the invitation cards or
proceedings of weddings that involve the taking of dowry.
Inspite of such a clarion call from him, his followers still
take
dowries. As some one remarked on the net, the one good way to eradicate
this practice is to brand the practice as unfashionable or
uncultured and make it a social taboo by the educated groups.
However, I do not see it as wrong in giving wedding gifts etc. as long
as the gifts are appropriate for the occasion and given voluntarily.
......A. Natarajan (....ihnp4!hou2d!nataraj)
201-949 9673shah@cornell.UUCP (Frank Rhodes) (10/18/85)
Last few weeks have seen a number of articles on the subject of dowry.
While we all have expressed our indignation at the existence of such a system,
I felt that the postings so far have failed to put the problem in a proper
perspective and viewed it only in isolation.
The fact remains that dowry is only one of the many problems that
women face in India today. Our social, political, economical and religious
systems have generally promoted or maintained man-woman inequality, to the
disadvantage of the latter. That dowry is such a hot topic of discussion is
due to the fact that it manifests itself in rather heinous form of dowry-deaths
and that we are asked very embarrassing questions about it by our non-Indian
friends here!. (I personally find rape and wife-beating to be more severe crimes
against women as they leave permanent scars, whether physical or mental, on the
victim; at least in a dowry-death the agony does not last forever. But rape
and wife-beating happen in almost all societies, not just in India! In fact
the US constitution turns a blind eye to violence in the family under the garb
of not intruding in the private lives of the citizens!!)
What I found disconcerting in the articles posted before were the
suggestions and solutions to eradicate dowry: some suggested that the groom
must vow not to take dowry, even at the expense of incurring the wrath of his
family, some suggested to make taking dowry `unfashionable', some even took
recourse to Kaanchi etc. Shankaracharya! I think these solutions are ad-hoc
at the best and parochial at the worst.
What we must aim for an absolute equality between men and women, in all
spheres of life. The question of treating the bride as a commodity would not
arise in such a setting. This solution is difficult to achieve and may take
long but in my opinion is the only solution. It will require that we radically
alter our family, social, political and economical structures. Given the
patriarchal system that we have, it will mean that the men will have more
to `lose' in terms of their power over women. It's a pity that the feminist
movement in India is weak and in a state of infancy; I don't know of many
organisations, save a few in Bombay and Delhi, that fight for equal rights for
women. I'd like to know more about it.
Doesn't the fact that all the posters so far have been men say something
about opportunities for higher education for women in India? I certainly wish
that some women would also speak up on the topic.
Cheers,
amitabh'
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Amitabh Shah ({decvax|ihnp4|uw-beaver|vax135|...}!cornell!shah)
Dept. of Computer Science
Cornell University
Ithaca NY 14853.
(607) 272-8782.jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman) (10/23/85)
I couldn't let this go by without comment. > > (I personally find rape and wife-beating to be more severe crimes > against women as they leave permanent scars, whether physical or mental, on the > victim; at least in a dowry-death the agony does not last forever. But rape > and wife-beating happen in almost all societies, not just in India! In fact > the US constitution turns a blind eye to violence in the family under the garb > of not intruding in the private lives of the citizens!!) > Amitabh Shah ({decvax|ihnp4|uw-beaver|vax135|...}!cornell!shah) A while back in net.women, a man suggested that rape is a worse crime than murder, because rape leaves a woman with fears and other emotional pains for the remainder of her life, while a murder victim at least doesn't have to suffer after the comission of the crime. Many women disagreed with this, saying that they preferred to stay alive. I don't remember any woman agreeing with him, saying that she would rather be killed than raped. Rape and other types of violence against women are terrible crimes, but I don't think any purpose is served by over-dramatizing this fact. Also, it is not true that family violence is protected by the U.S. Constitution. I challenge anyone to name or quote the section of the Constitution that protects wife beaters. In fact, the State of California (and every other state, I believe) has laws against wife beating. The fact that such laws are not enforced very well has a lot to do with the U.S. being a male-dominated society, and nothing to do with the Constitution. -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) "Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent..." {amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff