Some time back Chandu uncle (Chandrashekhar Vairale) shared a status update by Pallavi Trivedi on my Facebook wall and from that, I got an idea for the subject of today's post. Why do most in-laws treat very differently their son-in-law compared to their daughter-in-law? The same can be said about the son and daughter, and I feel the same feeling of gender discrimination that discriminated between son and daughter translated into a different attitude towards son-in-law and daughter-in-law. This is the case observed in most cultures, and definitely in Indian culture. I can confirm this about the Indian culture because I have spent most of my life in India and don't
know in detail about other cultures. Normally, the son-in-law always gets preferential or even royal treatment whenever he visits his in-laws home but similar treatment is not offered to their daughter-in-law (except when she arrives for the first time). Now before people jump with their emotional statements and arguments about culture and traditions I know that this issue is not as simple and straightforward as it looks, there are many aspects associated with it and that's why I am writing this post, and also want to know what other people think about this topic.
I also know that some people want to continue with such discriminatory traditions and I am interested in listening to their views also. I am not against all traditions or any culture but want to analyze things that directly or indirectly contribute to encouraging gender discrimination. Frankly, I don't care from which culture or tradition they such practices come from. So, coming back to the topic of the post. One justification people might provide is, that the son-in-law visits the house of his in-laws rarely or on specific occasions and that's why he is offered such exceptional treatment but it doesn't make any sense to offer similar treatment to the daughter-in-law as she is a permanent resident in her in-law's house. It is a very weak argument in today's world where families are becoming more and more nuclear. Most couples do not live with their in-laws anymore. However, if they do, they live with the boy's parents and not with the girl's parents. Take this very common scenario, it's expected from the daughter-in-law that she should help with household work whenever she visits her in-law's home but the same thing is not expected from the son-in-law. Isn't this a very classical example of a difference in attitude towards son-in-law and daughter-in-law? This is not an issue of culture or tradition or a natural role assigned to man and woman by God/society/nature (or whoever else), but this is a classical case of gender discrimination. This is a convenience offered to men by themselves, because of the presence of a patriarchal society for centuries there are many traditions heavily favoring men and biased towards women. Patriarchy and misogyny have designed our societies and cultures to favor particularly one gender.
The second point that people often raise is that most of these rules and restrictions are forced on women by women themselves not by men, for example, the mother-in-law forcing the daughter-in-law to follow gender-biased traditions, so, it's not fair only to blame men for gender discrimination against women. Again, it sounds very valid argument, and there is some truth in it but this is not entirely true. The issue here is not about who is implementing or forcing the rules or traditions but who designed them and why? Most bullets fired on Indians during the freedom struggle movement were fired by Indian policemen but we don't blame them for this, all blame goes to British officers who gave the firing orders. But somehow in this case it seems people want to put the blame on women just because some actions against women are performed by other women, but very seldom do people want to look into the problem carefully and understand the actual reasons behind it. I am not saying that women are not responsible for gender discriminatory practices, they are very much at fault, but at the same time, we need to consider social conditions that force such behavior. Social conditions, which involve everything from religion, culture, and traditions are the main reason for this type of behavior from both genders, and the blame rests on the shoulders of men more because they designed most of these traditions.
Gender equality is a need in today's world. We need to change our attitude and modify all traditions and rituals that openly discriminate based on gender, race, or any other thing. I am sure there will be resistance or even uproar against this change but without struggle, there will not be any change. Son-in-law or daughter-in-law are the same, there is no superior or inferior here, and they should get the same treatment. I don't think any sensible person will oppose nondiscriminatory traditions. Old is not always gold, sometimes it is trash and we need to get rid of it. Let's start new nondiscriminatory traditions and let's begin it from our own homes.
Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic.
The second point that people often raise is that most of these rules and restrictions are forced on women by women themselves not by men, for example, the mother-in-law forcing the daughter-in-law to follow gender-biased traditions, so, it's not fair only to blame men for gender discrimination against women. Again, it sounds very valid argument, and there is some truth in it but this is not entirely true. The issue here is not about who is implementing or forcing the rules or traditions but who designed them and why? Most bullets fired on Indians during the freedom struggle movement were fired by Indian policemen but we don't blame them for this, all blame goes to British officers who gave the firing orders. But somehow in this case it seems people want to put the blame on women just because some actions against women are performed by other women, but very seldom do people want to look into the problem carefully and understand the actual reasons behind it. I am not saying that women are not responsible for gender discriminatory practices, they are very much at fault, but at the same time, we need to consider social conditions that force such behavior. Social conditions, which involve everything from religion, culture, and traditions are the main reason for this type of behavior from both genders, and the blame rests on the shoulders of men more because they designed most of these traditions.
Gender equality is a need in today's world. We need to change our attitude and modify all traditions and rituals that openly discriminate based on gender, race, or any other thing. I am sure there will be resistance or even uproar against this change but without struggle, there will not be any change. Son-in-law or daughter-in-law are the same, there is no superior or inferior here, and they should get the same treatment. I don't think any sensible person will oppose nondiscriminatory traditions. Old is not always gold, sometimes it is trash and we need to get rid of it. Let's start new nondiscriminatory traditions and let's begin it from our own homes.
Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic.
(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)
Hi Vinay,
ReplyDeleteYes, it’s unfortunate to see the ill-treatment meted out to some of the daughters-in-law in our society and yes, the sons-in-law have traditionally been enjoying royal treatment. Our society is still very much male-dominated. This scenario is apparently undergoing a change, or so it seems from the surface. But dig deeper and you can still find shades of gender discrimination even today.
Traditionally, the daughter has been considered as a burden on her family, especially on her parents. The hackneyed phrase ‘Aurat ek paraya dhan hota hai’ says it all. The parents therefore tried to ‘get rid of’ this burden as soon as possible. Marrying off girls at young and immature ages is an obvious corollary to this ‘crooked’ thinking. Add to this the dowry and marriage expenses and the burden was apparently too much on the girl’s parents. Once married, therefore, the girl was expected to stay with her husband to the end (barring of course the girl paying occasional visits to her parents on festivals and the like). And the most hated fear that haunted the parents was their daughter’s divorce. Divorce would have meant the girl returning back to her parents and bringing along with her a still greater burden: social stigma. And this was the last thing the girl’s parents ever wanted – being looked down upon by the society. The daughter was therefore always advised never to leave her husband: be he a scoundrel, a wife-beater, an alcoholic or an adulterer. Irrespective of how unfair a treatment was meted out to her the girl was always advised to bear everything and be the underdog. She was supposed to forgive and forget and be the paragon of suffering by never speaking out a word against her husband or in-laws.
Needless to say, the girl’s family therefore held her in-laws’ family in much regard and gave the son-in-law a royal treatment. If you dig deeper you can see the girl’s family doing all this only to shy away from any future responsibility towards the girl. On the surface it seems to be a grand hospitality but generally such buttering up of in-laws, especially of the son-in-law, smells strongly of this shunning of responsibility towards the daughter, and more so of the shunning of social stigma that would follow in case the daughter’s marriage goes wrong in future. That’s why all the pampering of sons-in-law, I guess.
Thanks a lot for visiting the blog and sharing your views on this topic. I have to agree with most of the things which you mentioned in your comment. Many years of suppression of particular class and gender in our society has resulted in some wrong traditions and this in turn developed deep rooted fear in people's minds who then hesitate to question these things and are not ready to go against them.
DeleteOnce we become aware of these things I think it becomes our duty to question them and try our best to change them, it may not be easy or may not happen in our lifetime but our duty is to try to change the system, this blog is very small effort towards that direction. I am glad to see that there are people like you who understand the problem and are willing to raise their voice against this system. Through these small steps only we are going to challenge it and one day change will come, it's bound to come. Thanks again for sharing your views.