jha@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU (09/25/85)
It is even more deplorable that dowry is being *given*. As long as there are people willing to pay, there will be people willing to collect.
raghu@ut-sally.UUCP (Raghu Ramakrishnan) (09/29/85)
> It is even more deplorable that dowry is being *given*.
Well, dowry is a lousy system, and one that has soaked into our culture.
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? If you did, is it clear that you did the right thing in placing
your principles above her welfare?
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.
The worst he has to face is pressure from his own family, and while this
is a non-trivial issue, it is not insuperable.
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. rama@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (rama) (09/29/85)
The debate on dowry, or shall I say discussion, has been going on for a couple of days now and perhaps it is time we Indians sort the issue out. Since Raghu's article is the most recent, and in a way the most verbose, let me respond to him. Raghu, you have used two or three terms in your posting that may warrant a closer look. One, you talk of the inability to find a "good match" (my inverted commas) without a substantial dowry. Would you really feel happy if the only "good match" you found for your sister/daughter was one that you had to purchase? Would you be willing to marry the girl whose father/brother pays you the highest dowry? If the thought of accepting dowry repulses you, then then obviously in your personal philosophy, accepting dowry is abhorrent. Then why pray marry your sister/daughter to someone who practices a repulsive pernicious practice? Two, I somehow feel uneasy with the concept of finding a match for one's sister/daughter. If one looks beyond the obvious, it is reflective of our philosophy that the females in our (Hindu) society are incapable of acting on their own and living their own lives. There is no doubt that almost all the Hindu marriages in India are arranged and the decision making process in arranged marriages is hardly democratic. Of course, one might well make the argument that women in India lead a very sheltered life, and consequently are not capable of choosing between the good and the bad grooms. Well, do the parents/ elder brothers do a very good job when the predominant criterion seems to be dowry? At the worst, the role of the male is to carry information so as to enable clearing of the market, which is accomplished by finding buyers at the price the bride's party is willing to sell. At the best, the males in the bride's family conduct some background checks on the lifestyle of the male. All things considered, the female's life in India doesn't seem to be very enviable. Which now brings us to Raghu's thousand dollar question -- If the only way you can find a decent match for a girl is by offering dowry, and if dowry giving is unacceptable to you, is it proper to put your principles before the welfare of your sister/daughter? I am sorry Raghu, but if you dig a little deeper into your question, you will want to ask yourself --By selling my sister/daughter to some bidder in the marriage market is her welfare assured? Is that what the welfare of an individual is all about? I am convinved that you will want to reconsider your priorities. As long as we uphold the idea that a woman is only happy or most happy when she is married, your question is a moot one. But if we redefine welfare so as to accord women the role they deserve and that they have been so wrongfully denied for centuries, maybe you would want to ask to ask yourself different questions. Women are the spine of every nation, they work far harder than males, are almost always in the unwaged sector in many nations, particularly the third world and work under far hazardous conditions than males do. e.g. Over half the total energy consumption in India comes from non-commercial sources, mostly fire-wood and a little cow-dung. The firewood consumed is not in the form of large logs or thick branches but consists predominantly of twigs. leaves, small branches and other items. In a survey in a village called Ungra in Karnataka, it was found that women spent between six to eight hours collecting this "firewood", and figures for the nation were expected to be comparable. (I would be glad to supply references to anyone interested) Given that a day's inhalation of wood smoke (which is what almost all our rural women go through) is equivalent to smoking six packs of cigarettes a day, need we elaborate any more. ( See Anil Aggrawala -- The State of Indian Environment 1984) There is a lot more to this discussion of dowry, but for the moment I shall stop here. Perhaps more from my side later. Given k
raghu@ut-sally.UUCP (Raghu Ramakrishnan) (09/30/85)
> Is 'welfare' (for a woman) equivalent to being married? > Especially if 'marriage' amounts to the purchase of a groom? I've tried to summarise rama@ngp's points. They are both valid questions. My personal views on these questions are less important (especially since I have no sisters or daughters!) than the views of Hindus at large. In this context, the answer to the first question is an unequivocal YES. Let me emphasize that this does not reflect my personal opinion, and that I am not implying that this should be so. I am just pointing out a fact of life. Changing this view of women and marriage is going to take a very long time. As to the second, given that the custom is so pervasive, if you rule out everyone who takes dowry, you may rule out all suitors! And given that you consider marriage a sine qua non, you throws in your pennies and takes your chances. Anyway, all this begs the point that I was trying to make. If there are resolute people who wish to refuse to offer dowry, that's great. I was just observing that the much simpler (and complementary) action of refusing dowry was itself a rare phenomenon; and that even educated and wealthy (the latter attribute merely emphasizing the fact that they don't need the money) grooms were willing to sell themselves. Part of the answer (to why such grooms sell themselves) may lie in one of our many social hypocrisies. We condemn dowry, and in the same bated breath say "He got FIVE lakhs in dowry!!". aarrggh.
gopal@amdcad.UUCP (Gopal Srinath) (10/03/85)
Several of my friends have married in the past year and I am yet to hear of one who took dowry. Do the people who have posted responses on teh net on this issue actually know specific cases of dowry taking by educated grooms here? In my experience there are quite a few marriages here and in India without dowry. SO the picture is not as gloomy as it has been made out to be. It would also be good to receive responses from people who have actually been thru the matchmaking system or closely involved with the process for their siblings. They know the REAL situation.
mvramakrishn@watdaisy.UUCP (Rama) (10/05/85)
I don't think any body has addressed the root cause of the dowry
system. I feel arranged marriages lead to dowry in PRACTICE;
I am not saying arranged marriage SHOULD lead to dowry.
The last posting about this topic blamed the taker of dowry;
the one before blamed the giver. Both points have their merits
depending on various factors. To the best of my knowledge
(From the marriages of my friends and relatives) education
does play a role in dowry: THE EDUCATED BOY IS MORE COSTLY.
It is also true that a RICH boy is more costly than a poorer
one. One also finds that a "beautiful" girl (I mean her parents)
can buy a "better" boy for a given amount of money than a ....
If you take a sunday paper in India and browse through the matrimonial
column you see that the distribution of the requirements of the
boy is some kind of exponential function. Every girls parents
want the boy to be "Doctor/Engineer/Bank Officer" (well not really
some will settle for IAS/IFS officer). This is a simple problem
of supply and demand. What percent of boys are "Doctors/..." ?
Who will marry a clerk/truck driver/taxi driver/waiter etc?
Once a boy has narrowed down the list of girls he likes to marry
obviously he chooses to marry the one who can pay the most.
Another factor which affects the boys decision is the
LAW OF CONSERVATION OF DOWRY.
THE LAW:
If the number of brothers and sisters in a family
is equal, then there is no gain or loss of money
because of DOWRY.
If a brother decides to be a hero among his friends and refuses
to accept dowry, then where does he find a groom for her
sister who does not want dowry?
The whole system has degenerated starting from the gifts
given by girls parents(that is what I believe; Request to be
corrected on history). It could very well have been degenerated
the other way. i.e., the boy has to pay to the girls parents to
marry her! (There are some tribes in which this is the case)
Probably then a beautiful/educated/singer/dancer/... etc would
have been more costly to buy. An Engineer/.../rich boy could
buy a "better" girl than a clerk/.../. clerk for the same money.
(Two of my sisters were married in the last one year.
One got married to a rich engineer; nominal amount of dowry
another was married to a bank teller/clerk; standard amount of dowry.
Needless to say the first one was much better looking than the second.
Both were graduates.)
I don't think dowry can be eradicated until the decision as to
who marries whom is based on insufficient data as in the CURRENT
arranged marriages. Love marriages is *A* solution.
-------------------------------------------------------
I intended to enclose within quotes all words such as buy, sell, market
beautiful, better, good, bad,supply, demand etc.
Please read them so.
UUCP: {decvax,utzoo,ihnp4,allegra,clyde}!watmath!watdaisy!mvramakrishn
CSNET: mvramakrishn%watdaisy@waterloo.csnet
ARPA: mvramakrishn%watdaisy%waterloo@csnet-relay.arpa
Mail: M.V.Ramakrishna, Dept of Computer Science, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo Ont., N2L 3G1 Canadaswami@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (10/05/85)
an interesting sidelight : even if some grooms (and families) are willing not to take dowry, some parents feel compelled to give it (in the form of jewels etc - an inordinate quantity, i mean) simply bcos (1) they feel that some day the goom's family might get upset with the bride because she brought less dowry than the other daughters-in-law of the family (2) they feel that they must do so much for their daughters as a matter of social status. this also holds for grandiose wedding ceremonies. yes, i am speaking from personal experience.