raghu@ut-sally.UUCP (Raghu Ramakrishnan) (10/06/85)
Some people have posted articles saying that the incidence of dowry is much less that one would be lead to believe by some (other) articles on net.nlang.india. They were concerned about the image this conveyed to non-Indians, and wanted to know if the anti-dowry posters had first hand knowledge of dowry occurrences, especially in the US. I am one of those who posted some anti-dowry articles. I am aware of specific instances where dowry was taken among my friends and relatives in India. One of these involved a guy with a US degree and green card. I know of an instance in which the dowry issue resulted in a match being scrapped. I also know cases wherein considerations of dowry precluded the consideration of certain matches. I am a south Indian. I must admit that I have first hand knowledge of just 3 or 4 cases, and the rest is hearsay. But most people I have talked to confirm the importance of dowry in arranged matches. I am not aware of specific cases in the US wherein dowry was involved, but this could simply be because I haven't asked any of my friends who got married! If my impression of the prevalence of dowry is wrong, I'm glad. However, given my (limited, perhaps) knowledge, I think it is sufficiently widespread to be a serious issue, and I don't apologise for airing it on the net. After all, as someone pointed out, the purpose of this net is discussion; and not the projection of an image.
jha@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU (10/07/85)
> If you had a sister or daughter, given that her marriage would almost > certainly be an arranged marriage, and given that it would be very > difficult (in some castes, impossible) to find a good match without > offering a substantial dowry, and given the very real possibility of > harassment if she did not bring a good dowry, would YOU refuse to give > dowry? Yes. I would refuse to arrange such a marriage in the first place. On the contrary, I would encourage my sister/daughter to find her own match, and if a lot of people did that, the evil of dowry would certainly disappear. > Someone must take the first step in eliminating this custom. And it is the > groom. Typically he has the least to lose, and the most leverage to apply. It would be very nice if the groom took the first step. Realistically, however, it would be naive to hope that the party that has a vested interest in the perpetuation of this custom would call for its eradication. The initiative must come from the disadvantaged side. BTW, the groom is not the one who has the least to lose. Five lakhs (or whatever the current market rate is) is no chicken feed. > To me, the most disappointing feature of this dowry mess is the fact that > educated, affluent young men, including many settled in the US, accept > or at the least countenance their family's acceptance of dowry. Also, as somebody had earlier pointed out, parents settled in the US are giving dowries. I don't understand why girls raised in the US, or even in urban India, are pushed into such marriages. These girls are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, and can certainly find their own match. Manoj Jha ARPA: jha@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU CSNET: jha@uiuc.csnet USENET: uiucdcs!jha
bala@mordred (Bala Krishnamurthy) (10/08/85)
Before we fall off the cliff questioning the very purpose of this discussion
I would like to point out that, YES, it happens. And yes it has happened
in *this* country. It happens in middle class South Indian families (of
which I am a member).
There is no gainsaying the fact that there are n people in this country
who no longer acept/give dowry. The real questions to be attacked are:
(1) Is there *anyone* who takes/gives dowry ?
(2) Are we doing something to aid the process of eliminating this?
(3) Can we stand up to the "others" in India and boldly tell them
"Wrong. It is a crime. We can do without it."
(4) What prevents us from doing this?
Dowry in any form is still dowry. Accepting it meekly as an established
"tradition" is a cop-out. Ever think of not attending (or at least
not eating at) marriages of friends/relatives where you know dowry is being
given/taken? At least not being afraid to state your views openly?
It may not be much but social changes will not happen overnight, small
things like this go a long way in changing deep-rooted views.
For the "elders" who are reading this (I am 24) and still think,
"Oh it is no big deal to take dowry as long as the other person can
afford to give" - all I can say is -- stop and think. It is a crime. Period.
If you have changed one family's viewpoint you have done something.
Cheers,
bala
Balachander Krishnamurthy bala@purdue.EDU (ever reliable ARPA)
Dept. of Computer Science bala.purdue@csnet-relay (reliable CSNET)
Purdue University {ucbvax,decvax,hplabs}!purdue!bala (semi reliable usenet)
W. Lafayette IN 47907 317-494-7805 (um, well, er... GTE)paturi@harvard.ARPA (Ramamohan Paturi) (10/13/85)
I agree with Bala Krishnamurthy regarding his views on dowry. It is very easy to rationalize that it is OK to take dowry in certain circumstances. If one faces oneself honestly, deception will stare at him. It needs courage to accept that dowry in whatever form is exploitation of the oppressed and demeaning to oneself. Probably, one has to have a better sense of security, before one can shed one's dehumanizing values and acquire more humane values. One feels the threat of alienation from one's "social group" when one takes a stand which is in apparent opposition to the values of the social group. It is time for us (Indians) to grow out of the childish dependence on one's social group for security. Probably, this kind of dependence may have been more nurturing several thousands of years ago. But, it is now necessary for everyone to think for themselves and adopt a better set of values. -Ramamohan Paturi paturi@harvard.HARVARD.EDU
seshadri@t12tst.UUCP (Raghavan Seshadri) (10/14/85)
> From: bala@mordred (Bala Krishnamurthy) > Date: 8 Oct 85 15:20:31 GMT > > Dowry in any form is still dowry. Accepting it meekly as an established > "tradition" is a cop-out. Ever think of not attending (or at least > not eating at) marriages of friends/relatives where you know dowry is being > given/taken? At least not being afraid to state your views openly? > It may not be much but social changes will not happen overnight, small > things like this go a long way in changing deep-rooted views. > > For the "elders" who are reading this (I am 24) and still think, > "Oh it is no big deal to take dowry as long as the other person can > afford to give" - all I can say is -- stop and think. It is a crime. Period. I commend this suggestion . Raising consciousness by tactics such as social boycott is probably the best long term solution.People immune to appeals of decency and ethics are remarkably vulnerable to charges of being not 'modern' or 'fashionable'. Make dowry unfashionable and it will fade away. -- Raghu Seshadri
dss00@amdahl.UUCP (dss00) (10/17/85)
First the arranged marriage and now dowry. I am reminded of my
own dizzy days back in IITB several years ago. Used to be, when
world was black and white. There were absolute rights and absolute
wrongs. The mind errupted in uncontrolled rage to see any one
that held views that did not fit in what was the "right way".
Go on fellas. Feel indignant about the injustice.
However lest we forget -
Freedom and rights have seldom been given away by oppresors to the
oppressed. Almost all forms of liberties, including those from
social dogmas, have been won only when the victims of oppression
were willing to stand up and fight for their rights.
Flaming the perpetrators of injustice, when the large majority
of the victims are not willing to suffer the consequences of
refusing to submit to the injustice, is not going to solve any
problems.
--
Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058
(Usual Disclaimer Here)dss00@amdahl.UUCP (dss00) (10/17/85)
Raghu Seshadri writes: > > I commend this suggestion . Raising consciousness by tactics such as > social boycott is probably the best long term solution. When you boycott the person who took dowry, you penalize the victim along with the perpetrator. > People immune to appeals of decency and ethics are remarkably > vulnerable to charges of being not 'modern' or 'fashionable'. > Make dowry unfashionable and it will fade away. > -- > Raghu Seshadri It is plain economics that works here, not fashion. Besides, simply blaming those who accept dowry is wrong strategy. It will not solve any thing. As long as there are people who want to give dowry, there will be those who will take it. While we are at it, let us look at how this tradition came into being. In old days, girls did not have inheritence rights in their parents property. Dowry was a father's way of giving the daughter her share. It was not *negotiated* with the groom or his parents. The groom or his family had no right on what ever dowry the bride brought with her. It was her property. Under the Indian law girls have had equal inheritence rights for several decades now. But the dowry system has stuck around in its present degenerated form. (Oh, no dowry was either discussed or exchanged in my marriage. So please don't get personal.) -- Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 (Usual Disclaimer Here)
bhatnaga@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Bhatnaga) (10/19/85)
> It is plain economics that works here, not fashion.
Good that some one brought the economical aspect in here. Consider our
society, consider the commodities that are available in the market and
consider how difficult it is to acquire them. Now consider the short cuts
that people devise to acquire them when they can't acquire them otherwise.
Consider the prevelent bribery in our government machinery and consider
the tax theft and black marketeering present in our business.
Now consider dowry in marriages.It may look to be an
over simplification of a problem which is existing for
hundreds of years; it nevertheless is a major deterministic factor.
I consider dowry to be a continuation of the same evil socioeconomic
spectrum. We justify those who bend the government rules as 'tactful', we
condone business crimes as 'smartness' and most of us have found a similar
convenient justification of dowry. In most of the marriages and families
in northern India (at the least) giving and taking of dowry has become a
matter of prestige. The more the merrier. And with thousand and one ways
available to make and hide black money it has become very easy to give and
take dowry.
I know some marriages where the brides did nothing to discourage
getting expensive gifts from their families (in fact they encouraged).
They simply knew that this was an easy way to quickly achieve a standard
of living which will otherwise come in atleast a couple of years.
No criticism is good without a suggested solution but, unfortunately,
no solution is easy! (How) Can we stop bribery, (How) Can we stop business
malpractices, (How) can we stop dowry?
Can we go for western type nuclear families where financial responsibilities
for a newly wed couple are less and financial independence is more. Yes, we can
but it will introduce many other equally bad social problems (I dont want
to cite any examples; it might lead to new issues and new flames).
Can we go for very stringent punishments for dowry givers and takers?
But who would you like to punish- the groom, the bride, the parents?
Can we wait till our national wealth increases, population explosion stops
and dowry becomes undesirable and unwanted? Yes we can but it will take
thirty or three hundred years? It might even be a Utopia.
One thing that we can do (and we are doing)is that if we think that dowry
(or bribery or blackmarketeering) is bad we can tell a friend that it is
so. It might help.
Neeraj Bhatnagar
bhatnagar@red.rutgers.edupaturi@harvard.ARPA (Ramamohan Paturi) (10/19/85)
Deepak Sabnis writes > > Go on fellas. Feel indignant about the injustice. > However lest we forget - > > Freedom and rights have seldom been given away by oppresors to the > oppressed. Almost all forms of liberties, including those from > social dogmas, have been won only when the victims of oppression > were willing to stand up and fight for their rights. > Flaming the perpetrators of injustice, when the large majority > of the victims are not willing to suffer the consequences of > refusing to submit to the injustice, is not going to solve any > problems. > > -- In s sense, we all are victims of both the arranged marriage system and the dowry system. Some are more directly affected and the others less directly. I feel that the discussion on the net about the dowry problems is not just flaming the "perpetrators". It tried to assert that dowry in whatever form is evil. (In these days, unequivocal statements are hard to be found.) It stated that dowry is also common among Indians living in USA. Some people tried to offer explnations. More enthusiastic people have suggested some "action" in combating this evil. It is true that not many people (except Linda Seltzer) have yet talked about the equality and the education and the opportunities for women. Equality for women in all respects is a sure way to get rid of the dowry system. More commnets on how this equality can be achieved should be welcome. Even though Deepak fails to mention how the victims can fight the evils, I assume that while writing his letter, he has in his mind such ideas like the active participation of women in combating the dowry system and the equlity for women. I hope Deepak's letter is just not an expression of indignation over indignant people. -Ramamohan Paturi paturi@harvard.HARVARD.EDU
paturi@harvard.ARPA (Ramamohan Paturi) (10/19/85)
Deepak > Raghu Seshdri > > Ramamohan (no prefix) > > > > People immune to appeals of decency and ethics are remarkably > > vulnerable to charges of being not 'modern' or 'fashionable'. > > Make dowry unfashionable and it will fade away. > > -- > It is plain economics that works here, not fashion. > Besides, simply blaming those who accept dowry is wrong strategy. > It will not solve any thing. > As long as there are people who want to give dowry, there > will be those who will take it. Deepak is simply taking one side of chicken versus egg argument. I feel that all the factors that are responsible for the dowry system should be taken into account. Both the "donor" and the "recipient" have to modify their attitudes if the dowry has to be eradicated. > While we are at it, let us look at how this tradition came into > being. In old days, girls did not have inheritence rights > in their parents property. Dowry was a father's way of giving > the daughter her share. It was not *negotiated* with the groom > or his parents. The groom or his family had no right on > what ever dowry the bride brought with her. It was her property. > Under the Indian law girls have had equal inheritence rights > for several decades now. But the dowry system has stuck around > in its present degenerated form. > This story does not even scratch the surface. It is an academician's diversion from the essetial point. It is more relevant to know why and how the dowry system has "stuck around in its present degenerated form". Hope I can tell something more about it later. -Ramamohan Paturi paturi@harvard.HARVARD.EDU
sankar@Shasta.ARPA (10/22/85)
Dowry is but one crime that goes on. There are many others that go on and emphasis must be given to everything. How many of you, including those of you who are against dowry, are willing to give your wives or to-be-wives an equal responsibility in various household decisions? I have seen people who boast about not having taken dowry, but at the same time have never entered the kitchen after marriage. How many men would be willing to give their wives more responsibility in regular day to day affairs? eg. financial responsibilities? How many men have traded a bit of their job satisfaction for a bit more job satisfaction for their wives, possibly by moving to a different place? Dowry is but one problem, the main issue is to give more equality to women. And dowry is the only problem amongst all these where the groom usually has not much control unless he is willing to go against his parents. There is no need to boycott grooms whose parents accepted dowry, why dont we boycott those grooms who have never cooked a meal for their wives? I am not a woman, but I strongly feel that the womans greater problem is not dowry, but finding LOVE after marriage from her husband. To conclude, personally I see dowry problems decreasing in India, slowly we see cases of women taking stronger stands against the giving of dowry. If I had a daughter, I would certainly not give any dowry. I would bring her up in such a way that she could make her own decisions in a responsible way independently. And love marriages are increasing at a very fast rate, and in those cases there usually is no dowry, or discrimination. Sriram.